/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2023/10/70f94a0005b05af7438e2553b057badc.jpg)
Child Act protects all kids, not just Malaysians - activist
The Child Act 2001 protects every child in Malaysia regardless of nationality, said child rights activist Hartini Zainudin, who questioned the authorities' treatment of four migrant children arrested over alleged criminal intimidation.
Criticising the detention of a nine-year-old boy and a magistrate's decision to deny bail to three other Myanmar children, the Yayasan Chow Kit founder questioned whether Malaysian children would have been treated the same way.
“After 30 years...
The Child Act 2001 protects every child in Malaysia regardless of nationality, said child rights activist Hartini Zainudin, who questioned the authorities' treatment of four migrant children arrested over alleged criminal intimidation.
Criticising the detention of a nine-year-old boy and a magistrate's decision to deny bail to three other Myanmar children, the Yayasan Chow Kit founder questioned whether Malaysian children would have been treated the same way.
“After 30 years in this work, I do not believe we would. We would call the parents, bring in welfare officers, mediate between neighbours, and use the Child Act as Parliament intended,” she said, according to Free Malaysia Today.
Hartini (above) stressed that the legislation had “no citizenship clause”, and its safeguards should apply equally to refugee and migrant children.
“The way the state has responded to these children should trouble anyone who works in child protection,” she added.
Yesterday, migrant rights group Tenaganita questioned whether child protection safeguards were observed in the handling of the boys, including the reported use of handcuffs during their court appearance.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2022/01/86a3e9b51f738dd4d3c47e747ad81fcf.jpg "Judge judging gavel court generic 120122")
On Friday, the Bukit Mertajam Magistrate's Court denied bail to three Rohingya boys, two aged 11 and another aged 12, who were charged with criminal intimidation of an elderly woman.
The Butterworth High Court subsequently overturned the decision and allowed the boys to be released on bail pending trial.
The three boys and a nine-year-old child were arrested on Oct 27 and held in custody for four days.
'No basis to detain nine-year-old'
Hartini questioned why the youngest child was detained despite provisions under the Penal Code exempting children below 10 from criminal responsibility.
“There is no lawful basis to hold a nine-year-old as a suspect,” she said.
She also pointed out that children below 14 could not be sentenced to jail, even if convicted.
Speaking to Malaysiakini, lawyer Anbananthan Yathiraju, who represented the children alongside Satia Raj through the Penang Legal Aid Centre, however, clarified that the nine-year-old boy has been freed.
”I spoke to the DPP; only three were charged. The nine-year-old has been released,” he said.
Hartini maintained that the authorities should have applied the protective provisions of the Child Act, including safeguards governing the detention and release of children.
She further raised concerns over whether the three boys understood the charges against them.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2023/10/fb81cfebe0ecb35101c7f1127091728c.jpg "Malaysianskini health stateless children human rights governance Dr Hartini Zainudin 051023 pix mukhriz hazim")
Although the court had arranged for an interpreter, Hartini noted that many Rohingya children do not speak Burmese, Myanmar’s official language.
She stressed that a child who did not understand a charge could not answer it meaningfully.
Was media coverage proper?
Hartini also questioned whether media coverage of the case had complied with Section 15 of the Child Act, which restricts the publication of information that could identify children involved in legal proceedings.
She criticised the use of photographs showing the children being brought to court, as well as reports disclosing their street address and identifying their families as living next door to the complainant.
“Section 15 of the Child Act exists to prevent exactly this,” she said.
The three boys were jointly charged under Sections 506 and 34 of the Penal Code with threatening to injure the elderly woman using several objects, including a mop, an iron rod, a white fluorescent light tube and stones.
/file/attachments/orphans/ZahidHamidi1_597968.png)
/file/attachments/orphans/SaifuddinNasutionIsmaildfds_146292.png)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/09/fd15339e0e6d86eea9a42c46840483d5.jpg)
/file/attachments/orphans/90834593045_307946.png)
/file/attachments/orphans/fpiojasdpioasdopds_666286.png)
/file/attachments/orphans/homeministry1asdeesd2_674391.png)
/file/attachments/orphans/homeministry1asdesd_153225.png)
The allegation is serious, and the elderly woman deserves to feel safe. But these are children, and how the authorities handle them matters too. Being Rohingya does not make them any less deserving of protection. A nine-year-old reportedly spending four days in custody should concern all of us. So should the questions about handcuffs, whether the children understood the interpreter, and whether media reports exposed their identities. These concerns deserve proper answers. Thank you, Hartini, for speaking up. Protecting children’s rights does not mean excusing harmful behaviour. It means addressing it fairly, with safeguards appropriate to their age. Surely we can protect the complainant and treat these children humanely at the same time.
Report this comment
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.