HOME

ABSTRACT

This article examines the rehabilitation and reintegration of former combatants, returnees, and ex-detainees in Malaysia, drawing on qualitative interviews with 11 participants. Reintegration emerges not as a straightforward "return home" but as a complex process shaped by surveillance, stigma, economic exclusion, and unresolved trauma. While Malaysian prisons emphasise religious counselling during incarceration, post-release interventions are largely ad hoc, consisting of casual "check-ins" by enforcement officers with little structured support. This theology-centric and security-driven approach risks producing only superficial disengagement, leaving underlying grievances unaddressed. Comparative analysis of Saudi Arabia's al-Munasahah programme, Denmark's Aarhus model, and Indonesia's BNPT framework demonstrates how more holistic interventions, combining psychological care, vocational training, community acceptance, and family support, enhance reintegration outcomes. The findings reveal that in Malaysia, barriers such as financial blacklisting, statelessness, and community stigma undermine long-term reintegration. At the same time, enablers like family ties, faith renewal, and employment provide pathways to stability. This study argues that effective reintegration must move beyond surveillance and ideology to embed rights-based frameworks that integrate psychosocial care, livelihood opportunities, and community trust-building. Without such reforms, Malaysia risks perpetuating cycles of exclusion and vulnerability to re-radicalisation, weakening the very security it seeks to preserve.

Malaysia's housing sector is an important part of the national economy, built on a balance between developer innovation and homebuyer protection. In Peninsular Malaysia, the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 ('HDA') serves as the cornerstone, while Sarawak operates under the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Ordinance 2013, and Sabah adheres to the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Enactment 1978. Together, these laws, along with their associated rules and regulations, regulate developers and safeguard purchasers, ensuring a structured and equitable property market throughout Malaysia.

Administered by the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, the HDA has been tested and refined by two pivotal Federal Court decisions: Ang Ming Lee & Ors v. Menteri Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan & Anor and Other Appeals ('Ang Ming Lee')^[1] and Obata-Ambak Holdings Sdn Bhd v. Prema Bonanza Sdn Bhd & Other Appeals ('Obata-Ambak').^[2] These rulings have clarified critical aspects of the HDA and its subsidiary legislation,^[3] addressing disputes over project delays and compensation. This article examines the key provisions for the HDA, analyses several landmark cases, and examines their significant impact on Malaysia's housing industry.

Dua pemimpin anak negeri Sabah tampil memberikan respons terhadap kenyataan yang dibuat oleh Presiden Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation, Daniel John Jambun yang mencadangkan reformasi besar-besaran terhadap sistem Mahkamah Anak Negeri, termasuklah pengecualian pegawai-pegawai Muslim daripada pentadbiran hal ehwal anak negeri.

Kenyataan beliau yang menyarankan bahawa hanya anak negeri bukan Muslim sahaja yang layak mentadbir institusi berkaitan undang-undang adat telah menimbulkan kebimbangan terhadap arah tuju dan nada perbincangan reformasi ini.

The apex court rules that transactions premised on gambling activities are against public policy and are illegal, null, and void.