top of page
Search

5/7 Southeast Asia & drugs - Malaysia

  • Benjamin-Alexandre Jeanroy
  • Jun 23, 2016
  • 7 min read

Malaysia is a perfect example of the ambiguity that defines Southeast Asian nations in regard to illicit drug policy. While in the 1980’s, the country “paved the way for compulsory detention” (Baldwin, 2013), many considers Malaysia to be today a “regional pioneer” (OSF, 2014) in drug policy reforms, further challenging the mainstream regional views on the matter. While, just as in other nations of the region, illicit drug consumers remain heavily stigmatized, in 2010, the country started replacing compulsory centers (Tanguay, 2011) by voluntary harm reduction and treatment services. An emerging trend appeared to take form and included the institutionalization of centers providing “inpatient and outpatient services to people who use drugs.” (Ibid.)

Known as “Cure & Care” facilities, these centers provide voluntary services, notably drug substitution therapies and peer counseling. These centers are slowly showing results despite still being negatively perceived by the public. As the first country of the region to have transitioned from compulsory to voluntary treatment centers, Malaysia is presented as a role model by most of the U.N. agencies (UNAIDS, 2013, p. 51). UNODC (2011b) arguably took its time to do as such, but is now on the same page as the rest of the U.N. system. However it is crucial to understand that Malaysia’s core functioning of the "Cure & Care" centers remains “firmly embedded in the belief that everyone can and should be “cured” from drug use.” (Baldwin, 2013)

In 2012, Malaysian government officials, along with representatives of Indonesia went on a study tour in Portugal, to observe the results of a decade old progressive policy evolving around decriminalization and voluntary treatment services (Fawthrop, 2012). The tour seems to have had some effects on the policy makers (1) as the country is currently redefining its National strategic plan on HIV/AIDS, and therefore its drug policy approach towards a more science-grounded and compassionate out-take. In December 2013, as the Malaysian parliament conducted conferences on drug policy reforms, observers and officials felt “a growing need and desire to adapt to emerging realities with evidence based solutions.” (Malaysia, 2013) In regard to the history of drug use in the country, and the general influence of drug policy views of the region, these evolutions can only be positively noticed.

Historical background

The history of modern drug consumption in Malaysia can be roughly divided between colonial and post-independence eras. Under colonial rule, “opium was the primary drug of choice and its use remained largely confined to immigrants from China working for the British.” (Baldwin, 2013) Later on, with the Union’s Jack flag gone, “increase exposure to counter cultural movements in the 1970s, (helped) drug use spread into the emerging Malay middle class.” (Rusdi & al., 2008)

By the 1980s, the government created an “anti-drug task force” which undertook military style operations meant to disturb illicit drug trafficking (Ibid.). During this period, the 1983 Drug Dependence Act was enacted and “required anyone testing positive for heroin use to be sentenced to compulsory rehabilitation for two years.” (Baldwin, 2013) In line with and in support of this policy, came the proclaimed 1998 ASEAN “drug-free” goal (Reid & al., 2007) of which Malaysia was a leading advocate within the regional organization.

By the mid-2000s, Malaysia became “one of the first countries in Asia to scale up compulsory rehabilitation and by the mid-2000s had 28 government drug rehabilitation centres, each with the capacity to detain up to 500 inmates." (2) (Baldwin, 2013) Accordingly, and up until a couple of years ago, similarly to the views on the matter in other countries of the region, “drugs” were still viewed as a social menace that needed to be eradicated through 'harsh' policies.

However, during the decade and in parallel of the official prohibitionist rhetoric, Malays political and religious elites slowly shifted their minds in regards to drugs, notably due to the rising HIV prevalence among injection substance users. In 2003, the first Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT) programs were launched and in 2004, needles and syringes started to be distributed through state-sponsored programs.

It should also be noted that the U.N. Millennium Goals played a significant part in the drug policy shift observed during the 2000’s. Realizing that Goal 6, aimed to fight HIV/AIDS and other diseases, was not going to be achieved, Malays authorities - especially the Minister of Health at that time Chua Jui Meng - led a charge advocating for reforms, warning of an “imminent public health crisis.” (Tanguay, 2011) Other researchers argued that civil society organizations played an equally important role in the policy shift, notably through advocacy for harm reduction practices towards Malays officials and by enrolling religious lobbies.

Current drug legal framework

Malaysia’s current drug control policy evolves around several key legal components:

  • The 1952 Dangerous Drugs and Poisons Acts, are the key legislation for illicit drug control in the country. The Acts prohibit the consumption of certain substances and allow compulsory urine testing, with enhanced penalties for repetitive offenders. Furthermore, “possession in excess of statutorily specified amounts creates a presumption of trafficking, which carries stringent penalties” (Baldwin, 2013), including the death penalty;

  • The 1983 Drug Dependence (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act mandates forced rehabilitation up to two years for any person suspected of being “dependent”. Underage suspected consumers can be exempted from jail time. Perhaps more problematic, is that it created a legal obligation for all health practitioners to report any patients treated for illicit drug dependency;

  • The 2011-2015 National strategic plan on HIV/AIDS is a notable progress in terms of drug policy. The Plan officially endorsed the principle of harm reduction despite the fact that the concept was clearly in opposition to the Drug Dependence Act. Policies of the Plan included Opioid Substitution Treatment (OST) and MMT guidelines “which allow registered medical officers to dispense methadone and buprenorphine, and the NSPs’ standard operating policy and guidelines that endorse syringe distribution.” (Baldwin, 2013);

  • Finally, the Malay ‘Drug Lab’ was set up in 2010 as a “think-tank” to work on drug policy reforms. The group is composed of representatives from the different ministries involved in drug policy, coordinated by international agencies and private sector consultancy.

In October 2015, more than 1000 researchers, government and international organizations representatives, advocates, community leaders and service providers met in Kuala Lumpur for the 24th International Harm Reduction conference. This conference notably took place in Southeast Asia, “to consider drug policies that offer alternatives to the failed goal of Drug Free Asia by 2015 set by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).” (Malinowska-Sempruch, 2015)

Malaysia was selected for several reasons by the organizers, notably to highlight the paradoxes that constitute the region in terms of drug control. On one side, the country has been committed to use harm reduction services and evidence based drug treatment, allowing hundreds of people to receive methadone treatment. On the other side, Malaysia still upholds a mandatory death penalty for several drug offenses and close to a thousand people are still today on death row for such offenses (3).

In conclusion we can assert that Malaysia remains a stunning example of the current history of drug control policy and the notably slow shift being operated in the region due to the drug injection HIV related health crisis. But illicit drug consumers still suffer stigmatization and the idea that everyone should be cured remains deeply entrenched within even some of the most humane and compassionate harm reduction policies of the region on the matter.

 

1) For Nicholas Thomson of the John Hopkins School of Public Health and the Center for Law Enforcement and Public Health, “in Malaysia the rolling out and scaling up of harm reduction projects has been in part a result of senior police figures in Malaysia attending study tours in Portugal.” (Fawthrop, 2012)

2) In 2008, more that US$16 Million was spent during the year to run these facilities (Malaysia, 2013).

3) A recent poll has confirmed than more than half the country population has turned for the first time in recent history against inflicting mandatory death penalty for drug related offenses (Malaysia, 2016). Consequently the government may actually be looking to remove this provision that often leaves judges with no discretion as to enact lighter sentences.

Comments

 

UPEACE

  • Facebook - Black Circle
  • Twitter - Black Circle
  • LinkedIn - Black Circle
  • SoundCloud - Black Circle
bottom of page