Release children detained under Sosma

 

Child Rights Innovation and Betterment (Crib) Foundation and the undersigned are concerned by reports that at least six children have been arrested and detained under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma).

This includes two 17-year-old boys arrested at their homes in Alor Setar and Langkawi on Feb 15, 2026, and reportedly held at Bukit Aman for more than two weeks.

The arrest of children at home and their continued detention under a security statute raise serious questions as to whether the correct legal framework is being applied.

Sosma was enacted as a special procedural law for serious security offences. It provides extended detention powers and modified safeguards intended for exceptional adult cases, including detention for investigation under Section 4, which may be extended up to 28 days. It was not designed as a child-justice statute.

Children are to be dealt with under the Child Act 2001 and the Court for Children framework, read with Malaysia’s obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Section 83(1) of the Child Act provides that its provisions relating to the arrest, detention, and trial of children prevail over other written laws.

Section 84 requires that a child arrested be brought before a Court for Children within 24 hours. Section 85(a) requires that a child in detention be separated from adult detainees.

That framework is premised on rehabilitation, judicial supervision, mandatory consideration of the child’s best interests, and detention only as a measure of last resort.

Routing children into a security detention regime displaces that structure.

Safeguarding children

Where the state forms the view that a child has committed a serious offence, the proper course is to charge the child and bring the matter before the appropriate court with the full safeguards afforded to children under the law.

The use of Sosma detention powers in relation to minors bypasses those safeguards.

Malaysia appeared before the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child in January and affirmed its commitment to strengthen child protection systems, align domestic law with the convention, and ensure that detention of children remains exceptional.

Those commitments must apply in difficult cases, including those categorised as security-related. They cannot operate only where circumstances are uncomplicated.

Article 3 of the convention requires that the best interests of the child be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children. Article 37(b) requires that deprivation of liberty be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time.

For completeness, Article 37(c) and (d) further require separation from adults, maintenance of family contact, and prompt access to legal assistance and review of detention. These are binding obligations undertaken by Malaysia.

ADS

And invoking national security does not suspend the Child Act 2001, the Federal Constitution, or the country’s treaty obligations.

Structural problems

The present situation also raises broader structural concerns. National security legislation does not contain explicit statutory safeguards tailored to children.

The absence of clear legal boundaries between adult security enforcement and child justice creates a risk that minors will be subjected to procedures designed for adults, without the mandatory assessments, welfare supervision, and rehabilitative focus required in cases involving children.

If the authorities intend to investigate minors for serious offences, they must do so within the child-justice framework. Prolonged security detention of children is inconsistent with that framework.

We therefore call on the home minister, police, the Attorney General’s Chambers, and the government to:

• Immediately release all six children from detention under Sosma.

  If investigations are to continue, the children must be returned to parental care or placed within the lawful structures provided under the Child Act 2001, subject to judicial oversight and best-interests determinations.

• Ensure immediate, confidential and meaningful access to family members and legal representation, consistent with Article 37(c) and (d) of the convention, and ensure that no child is interviewed or investigated without appropriate safeguards.

• Issue a clear directive that children are not to be arrested or detained under Sosma, and that all cases involving minors must proceed strictly under the child-justice system.

• 4. Undertake legislative reform to expressly prohibit the application of Sosma detention powers on children, and introduce explicit statutory safeguards where national security allegations involve minors.

• Strengthen independent oversight of child deprivation of liberty, including through a fully empowered and independent Children’s Commission reporting to Parliament, with authority to monitor detention facilities and require responses from enforcement agencies.

• Institutionalise mandatory training for enforcement officers, prosecutors, and judicial officers on best-interests determinations and child-sensitive procedures, and ensure that child-responsive budgeting supports these safeguards in practice.

Malaysia has affirmed, domestically and internationally, that the rights of the child are not secondary considerations. Those assurances must be reflected in the legal pathways chosen when children are arrested.

Children should not be processed through a security detention architecture designed for adults. - Mkini

---

Among others who endorsed the statement are Hayat, Family Frontiers, and Yayasan Chow Kit.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.