Refugees/Rohingya at risk as PH/MADANI tries to win NS and other upcoming elections? Principle of NON-REFOULMENT? Malaysia's reputation as a CARING nation respecting Human Rights at RISK?

If a country housing Palestinian Refugees comes to an agreement with the Zionist Israel regime to return 5,000 Palestinians to Israel or Israel Occupied Palestine is ABSURD - so too is Malaysian PM Anwar's Prime Minister's agreement with Myanmar to return 5000 Rohingya back to Myanmar 

Myanmar has agreed to take back 5,000 Rohingya currently in Malaysia following negotiations between the two countries, says Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. The breakthrough reflected Malaysia’s strong diplomatic ties with the nation, he said. - Star, 30/7/2026

DID the 5,000 Rohingyas AGREED to return to Myanmar as this is the MOST IMPORTANT question? 

Do they feel safe?  REMEMBER, here we are talking about REFUGEES and ASYLUM seekers who had to flee MYANMAR ... and to date there has yet been any change in the Myanmar regime on their attitude about Rohingya or the various ethnic minorities... 

What Anwar is doing or planning to do about these Sunni Muslim Rohingya may be a violation on the principle of NON-REFOULEMENT itself....

Follow the Charles Hector channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb6UokfB4hdNugYmph1B 

 

Refugees are people forced to flee their own country and seek safety in another country. They are unable to return to their own country because of feared persecution as a result of who they are, what they believe in or say, or because of armed conflict, violence or serious public disorder.

The principle of non-refoulement requires that asylum applicants be protected against return to a place where their life or freedom might be threatened until it has been reliably ascertained that such threats would not exist and that, therefore, they are not refugees. Every refugee is, initially, also an asylum applicant; therefore, to protect refugees, asylum applicants must be treated on the assumption that they may be refugees until their status has been determined. Without such a rule, the principle of non-refoulement would not provide effective protection for refugees, because applicants might be rejected at the frontier or otherwise returned to persecution on the grounds that their claim had not been established. ...UNHCR Note on the Principle of Non-Refoulement

Measures of refoulement are various and include expulsion/deportation orders against refugees, return of refugees to countries of origin or unsafe third countries, electrified fences to prevent entry, non-admission of stowaway asylum-seekers and push-offs of boat arrivals or interdictions on the high seas. 

Whenever refugees - or asylum-seekers who may be refugees - are subjected, either directly or indirectly, to such measures of return, be it in the form of rejection, expulsion or otherwise, to territories where their life or freedom are threatened, the principle of non-refoulement has been violated.

Furthermore, having regard to the nature and purpose of the principle, it also applies to extradition. Indeed, the protection of a refugee cannot be regarded as complete unless he or she is also protected against extradition to a country where he or she has reason to fear persecution.UNHCR Note on the Principle of Non-Refoulement

In fact, respect for the principle of non-refoulement requires that asylum applicants be protected against return to a place where their life or freedom might be threatened until it has been reliably ascertained that such threats would not exist and that, therefore, they are not refugees. Every refugee is, initially, also an asylum applicant; therefore, to protect refugees, asylum applicants must be treated on the assumption that they may be refugees until their status has been determined. Without such a rule, the principle of non-refoulement would not provide effective protection for refugees, because applicants might be rejected at the frontier or otherwise returned to persecution on the grounds that their claim had not been established. That the principle of non-refoulement applies to refugees, irrespective of whether they have been formally recognised as such - that is, even before a decision can be made on an application for refugee status 

In Malaysia, UNHCR had been the only one processing and according refugee status - BUT on 1/1/2026, Malaysia started its own processing and according refugee status - the end result being an issuance of a DPP card - but the laws are yet to be amended or enacted that recognize the holder of the DPP card - as a person legally permitted to be in Malaysia ...thus the RISK remains that even holders of Malaysian DPP cards may be still treated as 'undocumented foreigners' illegally present in Malaysia....However, Malaysia process has been TOO SLOW ..

Even With Malaysia’s Refugee Registration Document (DPP), A Refugee Is Still at Risk of Arrest,...Immigration Act Must Recognize DPP As Document Permitting Legal Stay in Malaysia, And

Without legal recognition, registered refugees still risk arrest, whipping (Malaysiakini)

Then, ODDLY Malaysia suspended UNHCR's ability to continue assessing and registering...WHY? 

Malaysia has asked the U.N. refugee ‌agency to temporarily stop registering new refugees in the country, as it builds a domestic system to manage asylum-seekers, the foreign ministry said on Thursday. Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Lukanisman Awang Sauni said the suspension would enable the government to implement ​its own refugee registration programme, known as the DPP, which it launched in January....According to the ​UNHCR, there were about 215,600 refugees and asylum-seekers registered with the agency in Malaysia at the end of February, more than half of them ethnic Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar. - Reuters, 23/7/2026

 

Malaysia's recent action raises QUESTIONS - Is it done to WOO VOTES in upcoming Negeri Sembilan State Elections and other upcoming elections ...noting there has been 'rumblings' about unhapiness of the existence of Rohingya in Malaysia. SO, was that action to STOP UNHCR refugee registration for now...and the Anwar's statement that 5,000 Rohingya's back to Myanmmar a DESPERATE attempt to woo greater VOTER SUPPORT? If yes, it is MOST UNACCEPTABLE... 

 

BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE ROHINGYA 

Hundreds of thousands of Rohingya, a Muslim ethnic minority group, have fled persecution in Myanmar’s Rakhine State, 

It is good that we look again at WHO the Rohingya people of Myanmar are - they have denied CITIZENSHIP...and even their RIGHT to VOTE removed. They were subjected to discrimination as to the number of children they can have ...   

Introduction

Discriminatory policies of Myanmar’s government since the late 1970s have compelled hundreds of thousands of Muslim Rohingya to flee their homes in the predominantly Buddhist country. Most have crossed by land into Bangladesh, while others have taken to the sea to reach Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand.

Beginning in 2017, renewed violence, including reported rape, murder, and arson, triggered an exodus of Rohingya, as Myanmar’s security forces claimed they were carrying out a campaign to reinstate stability in the country’s western region. The United Nations has said that those forces showed “genocidal intent,” and international pressure on the country’s elected leaders to end the repression continues to rise.

Who are the Rohingya?

The Rohingya are an ethnic Muslim minority who practice a Sufi-inflected variation of Sunni Islam. There are an estimated 3.5 million Rohingya dispersed worldwide. Before August 2017, the majority of the estimated one million Rohingya in Myanmar resided in Rakhine State, where they accounted for nearly a third of the population. They differ from Myanmar’s dominant Buddhist groups ethnically, linguistically, and religiously.

The Rohingya trace their origins in the region to the fifteenth century, when thousands of Muslims came to the former Arakan Kingdom. Many others arrived during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when Rakhine was governed by colonial rule as part of British India. Since independence in 1948, successive governments in Burma, renamed Myanmar in 1989, have refuted the Rohingya’s historical claims and denied the group recognition as one of the country’s 135 official ethnic groups. The Rohingya are considered illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, even though many trace their roots in Myanmar back centuries.

Neither the central government nor Rakhine’s dominant ethnic Buddhist group, known as the Rakhine, recognize the label “Rohingya,” a self-identifying term that surfaced in the 1950s, which experts say provides the group with a collective political identity. Though the etymological root of the word is disputed, the most widely accepted theory is that Rohang derives from the word “Arakan” in the Rohingya dialect and ga or gya means “from.” By identifying as Rohingya, the ethnic Muslim group asserts its ties to land that was once under the control of the Arakan Kingdom, according to Chris Lewa, director of the Arakan Project, a Thailand-based advocacy group.

What is the legal status of the Rohingya?

The government refuses to grant the Rohingya citizenship, and as a result most of the group’s members have no legal documentation, effectively making them stateless. Myanmar’s 1948 citizenship law was already exclusionary, and the military junta, which seized power in 1962, introduced another law twenty years later that stripped the Rohingya of access to full citizenship. Until recently, the Rohingya had been able to register as temporary residents with identification cards, known as white cards, which the junta began issuing to many Muslims, both Rohingya and non-Rohingya, in the 1990s. The white cards conferred limited rights but were not recognized as proof of citizenship.

In 2014 the government held a UN-backed national census, its first in thirty years. The Muslim minority group was initially permitted to identify as Rohingya, but after Buddhist nationalists threatened to boycott the census, the government decided Rohingya could only register if they identified as Bengali instead.

Similarly, under pressure from Buddhist nationalists protesting the Rohingya’s right to vote in a 2015 constitutional referendum, President Thein Sein canceled the temporary identity cards in February 2015, effectively revoking their newly gained right to vote. (White card holders were allowed to vote in Myanmar’s 2008 constitutional referendum and 2010 general elections.) In the 2015 elections, which were widely hailed by international monitors as free and fair, no parliamentary candidate was of the Muslim faith.

In recent years, the government has forced Rohingya to start carrying national verification cards that effectively identify them as foreigners and do not grant them citizenship, according to a report by the advocacy group Fortify Rights. Myanmar officials have said the cards are an initial step toward citizenship, but critics argue that they deny Rohingya their identity and could make it easier for the government to further repress their rights.

Why are the Rohingya fleeing Myanmar?

The Myanmar government has effectively institutionalized discrimination against the ethnic group through restrictions on marriage, family planning, employment, education, religious choice, and freedom of movement. For example, Rohingya couples in the northern towns of Maungdaw and Buthidaung are only allowed to have two children [PDF]. Rohingya must also seek permission to marry, which may require them to bribe authorities and provide photographs of the bride without a headscarf and the groom with a clean-shaven face, practices that conflict with Muslim customs. To move to a new home or travel outside their townships, Rohingya must gain government approval.

Moreover, Rakhine State is Myanmar’s least developed state, with a poverty rate of 78 percent, compared to the 37.5 percent national average, according to World Bank estimates. Widespread poverty, poor infrastructure, and a lack of employment opportunities in Rakhine have exacerbated the cleavage between Buddhists and Muslim Rohingya. This tension is deepened by religious differences that have at times erupted into conflict.

What’s caused the recent exodus?

Clashes in Rakhine broke out in August 2017, after a militant group known as the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) claimed responsibility for attacks on police and army posts. The government declared ARSA a terrorist organization and the military mounted a brutal campaign that destroyed hundreds of Rohingya villages and forced nearly seven hundred thousand Rohingya to leave Myanmar. At least 6,700 Rohingya were killed in the first month of attacks, between August 25 and September 24, 2017, according to the international medical charity Doctors Without Borders. Myanmar’s security forces also allegedly opened fire on fleeing civilians and planted land mines near border crossings used by Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh. 

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has described the violence as ethnic cleansing and the humanitarian situation as catastrophic. Rights groups and other UN leaders suspect acts of genocide have taken place, and in September 2018, a UN fact-finding panel released a report [PDF] that claimed the Myanmar government had “genocidal intent” against the Rohingya. The chair of the UN panel said it found clear patterns of abuse by the military, including systematic targeting of civilians, committing sexual violence, promoting discriminatory rhetoric against minorities, and creating a climate of impunity for security forces.

Since early 2018, Myanmar authorities have also reportedly cleared abandoned Rohingya villages [PDF] and farmlands to build homes, security bases, and infrastructure. The government says this development is in preparation for the repatriation of refugees, but rights activists have expressed concern these moves could be intended to accommodate populations besides the Rohingya in Rakhine.

Furthermore, some have raised doubts that the government’s tactics have been in response to ARSA attacks, with reports showing that the military began implementing its policies nearly a year before ARSA struck. Sectarian violence is not new to Rakhine State: security campaigns in the past five years, notably in 2012 and 2016, also resulted in the flight of tens of thousands of Rohingya from their homes... - The Rohingya Crisis by the Council on Foreign Relations (updated 23/1/2020)

In Myanmmar, there is ongoing persecution against many ethnic minorities - thus there are MANY asylum seekers and refugees from Myanmmar(BURMA as it was known before). When the military junta seized power, there are also many from the Opposition who are in Malaysia as refugees. Malaysia also have asylum seekers/refugees from Thailand and Philippines, and also was the destination of Acehnese seeking temporary refuge when there was a 'conflict' between Indonesia and Aceh.

Malaysia also is home to many refugees from other countries - possibly even Palestine. Remember how Anwar brought Palestinians injured to Malaysia for healthcare - though, in my opinion, a better response would have been sending medical teams, food and medical assistance to the countries that were then housing Palestinian refugees..

IN SHORT, Malaysia has had a POSITIVE REPUTATION globally when it comes to according temporary shelter to refugees, including the Rohingyas - BUT NOW, that positive image may be affected by reason of recent events including plans to send Rohingyas back to Myanmmar - so, the recent action by PM Anwar Ibrahim and his MADANI government may not be the position of the Malaysian people - and the government action may damage our reputation as a CARING NATION that believes and upholds human rights for all persons.

Anwar's decision to send back Rohingya people is also shocking because the situation in Myanmar has not changed for the better > will they give the Rohingya people citizenship, the right to vote and equal treatment as all other citizens? Myanmar's agreement to accept back Rohingya - is NOT the issue, the issue is WHETHER ROHINGYA IN MALAYSIA FEEL SAFE TO RETURN NOW TO THE COUNTRY THEY FLED FROM...

Remember, Anwar too had once fled to the Turkish embassy to seek 'refuge' - so he should understand more the plight of refugees and asylum seekers... 

Malaysia's opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim has left the Turkish embassy in Kuala Lumpur, where he sought refuge Sunday following sodomy accusations. Anwar has dismissed the charges as a "complete fabrication". - France 24, 30/6/2008 

MOST IMPORTANT - is that there is a case now before the International Court of Justice that is expected to render its FINAL decision at the end of 2026 - Should it NOT be better to consider this COURT decision before deciding whether Malaysia will send back Rohingya people to Myanmar?

The Gambia’s case alleging that Myanmar committed genocide against the Rohingya people began at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in January. The Gambia, which filed the case in 2019, accuses Myanmar of deliberately seeking to destroy the country’s minority Muslim population, the Rohingya, in whole or in part, through its military’s actions – allegations that Myanmar denies. It’s the first case brought to the ICJ by a third country in defence of another nation or group, and The Gambia is supported by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation as well as a number of other intervening countries. - International Bar Association, 9/2/2026

In January 2026, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held three weeks of hearings on the merits of the Rohingya genocide case, which The Gambia brought against Myanmar in November 2019 under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention)....When the decision on the merits of The Gambia’s case is made likely later this year, it will carry significant weight. The ruling will address the evidentiary threshold for genocidal intent and provide recognition and reparation for the suffering of the Rohingya people if successful, although enforcement will be difficult. - East Asia Forum, 17/3/2026

The refugee asylum seeker problem is REAL, as even the UNHCR does not anymore provide housing, food - only recognition. THUS, there is a problem of daily INCOME GENERATION for the purpose of survival, and there are possibly 200,000 to 300,000 refugees in Malaysia. The Malaysian government FAILED to address this PROBLEM - NO provisions for temporary residence and ... Malaysia has a LABOUR SHORTAGE, that Malaysia now have to depend on about 2 million plus migrant workers. Thus, Malaysia could have used this fact - to enable these refugee/asylum seekers to work legally in Malaysia - but oddly Malaysia did not. 

If refugee could work legally, then they could afford to earn and survive temporarily - and the problem of them working illegally in the informal sector - sometimes competing with locals could have been avoided...

Malaysia could have adopted a HUMAN RESOURCE POLICY - that prioritized LOCAL workers, then Refugee/Asylum Seekers - and if there is still a need then MIGRANT WORKERS. Earlier governments failed - and so did PM ANWAR and the MADANI government after governing for 3 YEARS 8 MONTHS? Finally in the beginning of 2026, Malaysia is talking about employment opportunities for refugees...

 

Myanmar will take back 5,000 Rohingya

---

Thursday, 30 Jul 2026 

 

JELEBU: Myanmar has agreed to take back 5,000 Rohingya currently in Malaysia following negotiations between the two countries, says Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

The breakthrough reflected Malaysia’s strong diplomatic ties with the nation, he said.

He said Myanmar had also agreed to accept 300,000 Rohingya from Bangladesh as part of the repatriation effort.

“They have now agreed to take back 5,000 Rohingya from Malaysia and 300,000 Rohingya from Bangladesh.

"Why? Because we negotiated. That is why maintaining good relations with other countries is important. These matters require careful diplomacy,” he said in his speech when meeting voters in Chennah yesterday.

Anwar stressed that Malaysia would not tolerate Rohingya refugees disrupting public order, saying that he had instructed the Inspector-General of Police to take firm action against those causing disturbances in public places.

Anwar said calls for the Rohingya to be deported had previously been difficult to implement because Myanmar had refused to accept them.

“People say ‘send them back, send them back’. But where do we send them? Previously, Myan-mar did not want to receive them.

“So we had to place them in designated locations,” he said.

The Prime Minister also urged the Rohingya community in Malaysia to respect local laws and avoid causing inconvenience to the public.

“This is our country. Malaysia is our country. Others should not disrupt it. That is why we have to be firm,” he added. - Star, 30/7/2026

Malaysia asks UNHCR to temporarily cease registration of refugees 

By Reuters

July 23, 20263:39 PM GMT+7Updated July 23, 2026

A Malaysian navy vessel patrols waters near Langkawi island, May 16, 2015. A boat crammed with migrants was towed out to sea by the Thai navy and then held up by Malaysian vessels on Saturday, the latest round of "maritime ping-pong" by Asian states determined not to let asylum seekers come ashore. TheUnited Nations has called on... Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab Read more

• Summary

• Malaysia launched a new refugee registration programme in January
• UNHCR says about 215,600 refugees and asylum-seekers were registered in Malaysia at end-February
• More than half those registered are ethnic Rohingya from Myanmar
• Malaysia is not a ​signatory to the UN refugee convention

KUALA LUMPUR, July 23 (Reuters) - Malaysia has asked the U.N. refugee ‌agency to temporarily stop registering new refugees in the country, as it builds a domestic system to manage asylum-seekers, the foreign ministry said on Thursday.

 

Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Lukanisman Awang Sauni said the suspension would enable the government to implement ​its own refugee registration programme, known as the DPP, which it launched in January.

Report Ad

"Through the DPP, ​the government can manage data in a more structured manner, including in identity ⁠verification, monitoring and regulation, without relying entirely on the records of any foreign entity," he told parliament's ​upper house, in response to questions from senators on Malaysia's efforts to manage Rohingya refugees.

 

According to the ​UNHCR, there were about 215,600 refugees and asylum-seekers registered with the agency in Malaysia at the end of February, more than half of them ethnic Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar. The country is not a signatory to the 1951 U.N. refugee ​convention and refugees are not allowed to work or get an education.

 

Report Ad

There has been a rise in ​online hate speech and misinformation targeting the Rohingya in recent weeks, with social media users accusing them of taking jobs ‌and ⁠land away from Malaysians.

 

The move to halt registrations would allow the UNHCR to focus on re-settling refugees in third countries, if they cannot be repatriated to their home nations, Lukanisman said, adding that authorities would continue to engage and cooperate with the agency regularly.

 

The Malaysian office of UNHCR did not immediately respond to ​a request for comment.

 

The  ​agency said on its ⁠website that Malaysia's refugee policies, including the DPP programme, "reflect an important step towards a structured, predictable, and nationally owned approach to protecting people forced to flee their ​country" and that UNHCR's work was "complementary to and in support of the state’s ​protection and ⁠humanitarian responsibilities."

 

Lukanisman said plans were also underway to deport approximately 5,000 Myanmar nationals detained in the country's immigration detention centres by naval vessels, subject to Myanmar's agreement. He did not provide further details.

 

In 2021, Malaysia deported more than 1,000 Myanmar ⁠nationals by ​ship, despite a court-ordered halt and rights groups saying the repatriation ​exercise had included asylum-seekers and UNHCR-registered refugees.

 

The military seized control of Myanmar in a coup in February 2021, plunging the country ​into civil war. Myanmar does not recognise the Rohingya as citizens.

Report Ad

Reporting by Rozanna Latiff; Editing by Kate Mayberry - REUTERS, 23/7/2026

International Court of Justice to Hear Rohingya Genocide Case Next Month

The outcome of the case could set important precedents for future ICJ genocide cases, including South Africa’s case against Israel.

By Sebastian Strangio

December 22, 2025

The Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, the seat of the International Court of Justice.

Credit: Depositphotos

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) will next month hear a landmark case accusing Myanmar of committing genocide against the country’s Rohingya minority, the court said on Friday.

The Gambia, a predominantly Muslim country, filed the case at the ICJ with the support of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in 2019, accusing Myanmar of committing genocide against the Rohingya.

The case pertains to the Myanmar military’s brutal “clearance operation” in August 2017. Justified as a response to scattered attacks by Rohingya militants, soldiers and Rakhine vigilantes torched villages, shot civilians, and drove an estimated 750,000 desperate people over the border into Bangladesh, where most remain in large refugee camps. United Nations investigators later said that the offensives showed “genocidal intent.”

In a statement, the ICJ, the U.N.’s primary judicial organ for inter-state disputes, stated that after a long period of preliminaries, the case will be heard from January 12 to 29. The Gambia will outline its arguments on January 12-15, which will be followed by oral arguments by representatives from Myanmar’s military junta from January 16-20. The ICJ has also allocated three days for hearing witnesses, although these hearings will be closed to the public and the press.

“The hearings will be devoted to the merits of the case and will include the examination of witnesses and an expert called by the Parties,” the ICJ said in its statement.

In December 2019, during the preliminary hearings, Myanmar’s former leader Aung San Suu Kyi appeared at the ICJ to defend her government against the charge of genocide, during which she said that The Gambia had presented an “incomplete and misleading factual picture of the situation in Rakhine State.”

Aung San Suu Kyi was overthrown in a military coup in February 2021 and imprisoned by the military. Just 10 days before the coup, her National League for Democracy (NLD) government filed a long list of preliminary objections challenging the court’s jurisdiction. The opposition National Unity Government, formed by ousted members of the NLD government, later announced that it was formally withdrawing “all preliminary objections” in the case and accepting the jurisdiction of the ICJ. However, officials loyal to the military junta have since represented Myanmar in the case.

The case has been brought under the 1948 Genocide Convention, which defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” Both Myanmar and The Gambia have signed the Convention.

Although the Rohingya is not the first genocide case that the ICJ has heard, according to Reuters, it could set an important precedent for future cases, including the case filed in late 2023 by South Africa against Israel over its war in Gaza.

Speaking at a special high-level meeting on the situation of the Rohingya at the United Nations General Assembly in September, The Gambia’s Minister of Justice Dawda Jallow said he hoped to see a judgment from the ICJ “soon after” the public hearings in January. - Diplomat, 22/12/2026

 

Tabung Haji RCI Report 'delayed' WHY? - PM Anwar and MADANI to be blamed - if 'monies' wrongly given out not yet recovered, and wrongdoers/criminals YET to be acted upon?

Anwar and MADANI government must shoulder BLAME in delay in disclosing the RCI, not taking steps to recover monies, not investigating/prosecuting the criminal liable, etc - they had 3 years PLUS, and they failed?  

The Lembaga Tabung Haji Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) commenced on July 14, 2021, when the Cabinet approved its formation, and completed/ended its inquiry report in July 2022. 

Thus, it was classified 'SECRET' and not disclosed transparently to the Malaysian public by then Prime Minister Ismail Sabri of PN government.

Follow the Charles Hector channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb6UokfB4hdNugYmph1B 

When Anwar Ibrahim became PM in November 2022, he had the power to declassify the RCI Report - and only now, after about 3 YEARS 8 MONTHS decided to finally disclose this very important RCI report - WHY NOW? Was it part of the Negeri Sembilan State Election strategy that reveals the fault of the Barisan Nasional regime that caused losses? 

Even though classified 'secret' - the Prime Minister and maybe all Cabinet members would have known the contents of the RCI - thus, they could have acted on it - to (1) Recover monies wrongly paid on as 'bonuses' to Directors and employees when Tabung Haji(and its subsidiaries) did not have PROFITS - but registered losses. VERY ODD - because dividends are paid out if there are PROFITS, and so too will bonuses to Directors and employees. How much are we talking about? Millions or Billions?

Now, the Tabung Haji is under the  Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Religious Affairs) - and this Minister like any other Minister or Deputy Minister is chosen by the then sitting Prime Minister ONLY according to the Federal Constitution - thus the PRIME MINISTER is ultimately responsible - and until GE14(2018) - it was Najib Razak. [It is absurd to suggest that any MINISTER is incompetent or incapable of dealing/monitoring matters about monies, investments, bonus, dividends - if he/she is so, then he/she should NEVER be appointed MINISTER who is responsible for ALL aspects of institutions/departments/agencies under said Minister's RESPONSIBILITY - we need quality MINISTERS > and the proposal of Parliamentarian approval before any Minister is appointed is a GOOD suggestion]

Tabung Haji and its many subsidiaries should not have been able to make any decisions without the approval of the said Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Religious Affairs).  Thus, the said Minister is RESPONSIBLE - and so is the Prime Minister and/or the Cabinet??

Now, the RCI recommended  splitting Tabung Haji's oversight. Under the proposal, the Religious Affairs Minister will retain control over Hajj operations, while the Finance Minister will take over the fund's multi-billion ringgit financial investments. > But has Anwar or the MADANI government acted on this and proposed needed amendments to the TABUNG HAJI ACT 1995 > No, they have not acted on this yet.

What did the RCI reveal - see what AI says.. 

Unjustified Payouts & Excessive Bonuses (AI search results)

• Illegal Dividends (Hibah): TH distributed a high 4.5% annual profit distribution and 1.75% Hajj hibah (totaling RM2.75 billion) in 2017 despite depleting its reserves and violating its governing Act, which forbids payouts during a deficit. [1, 2]
• Excessive Bonuses: Tens of millions of ringgit in unauthorized bonuses were paid out. In 2014, a two-month "special bonus" was awarded on top of an 11-month performance bonus while the institution was in a financial deficit. [1]

WRONG PAYOUTS can be recovered - but what has Anwar and the MADANI government done thus far since November 2022? How much of the said monies have been recovered to date? 

4. Problematic Investments (AI search results)

• Flawed Decisions: Investment decisions suffered from poor coordination between the Chief Investment Officer, CFO, and Treasury.
• 14 Troubled Portfolios: The RCI recommended immediate forensic audits into 14 problematic assets. The largest failure was in FGV Holdings Bhd, accumulating an unrealized loss of RM1.059 billion. Other major wiped-out investments included Trurich Resources (RM364.31 million impairment) and TH Marine (RM278 million impairment). [1]

Again, has Anwar and the MADANI government done these forensic audits YET - necessary to reveal other losses, and other wrongdoings?

1. Masked Financial Deficits & "Creative Accounting" (AI search results)

• Hidden Losses: TH operated with a continuous asset-liability deficit starting in 2014. [1]
• True 2017 Position: Under full financial standards (MFRS), TH should have recorded a net loss of RM1.4 billion in 2017 instead of the reported RM3.4 billion profit. [1]
• Impairment Failures: The fund failed to record massive declines in asset values for its property investments and underperforming subsidiaries. [1]
• Unearned Income: TH illegally booked dividend income from subsidiaries that had not actually paid those dividends. [1]

Thus, by paying out DIVIDENDS, Tabung Haji 'LIED' about its financial position - a serious BREACH OF TRUST issue - they should have been HONEST and TRANSPARENT and tell Malaysians about its FINANCIAL situation and predicament.

Must we now look at Amanah Saham Nasional (and other Trust Funds), KWSP, KWAP, etc ...and see if the DIVIDENDS paid out was based on PROFITS and financial position. OR HAVE THE PEOPLE BEEN DECEIVED - all because government wanted to represent that it was doing a GOOD JOB in governance of nation. WERE LOANS taken out to cover dividend payouts? 

ALL in all, TRUST in Government has ERODED ...

What has happened to those who BROKE THE LAW - have they been investigated, charged and TRIED in Court yet? Looks like NOT, because our Communication Minister said...only NOW will law enforcement be asked to act???

He[Government spokesman Datuk Seri Fahmi Fadzil] said the Cabinet had also agreed for enforcement agencies to immediately begin comprehensive investigations based on the report. "Parties involved will be brought to court if there are any violations of the law," he said. - NST, 29/7/2026

This means that Anwar and the MADANI government sat on the RCI report - and DID NOT even BEFORE ask law enforcement to investigate with a view of charging those who broke the LAW. This should have been done, soon after the RCI Report was out in June 2022, or at least soon after Anwar became Prime Minister at the end of 2022...

The people were left in the DARK as we did not even know the findings of the RCI until just now...

Can we say that this 'COVER UP' was to protect CRIMINALS? If Anwar did not reveal this RCI REPORT now, and then BN came back into power after GE16, would that government reveal the RCI REPORT - more so, since the problems arises during the BN Rule that ended in 2018 in GE14.

In my opinion, a ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY REPORT must IMMEDIATELY be revealed to the people - PM or Cabinet cannot for any reason HIDE the Report from the People...?? Was it a DEAL that Anwar had to make with BN when BN decided to join PH to form the MADANI government?

Azam Baki investigation was done by a Cabinet Select Committee - and that the Cabinet can arguably hide from the people but SHOULD not > BUT certainly NOT a Royal Commission of INQUIRY report/findings? If the PM/Cabinet can hide RCI Report/Findings > WHY should we ever ask for an RCI anymore?

ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY must be observed by government, more so a DEMOCRATIC Government > where the people chose the Members of Parliament, and these MPs choose the Prime Minister.

HAS Official Secrets have been ABUSED by Anwar and the MADANI government in this case, in my opinion. AND, one may ask 'FOR WHAT REASON?' in this case as the RCI was only investigating matters until 2020 - long before PM Anwar Ibrahim and the MADANI Government?

In the case of UMNO's Ismail Sabri, maybe it was to protect BN leaders and political leaders of past who were involved - BUT why did ANWAR not declassify it as soon as he became Prime Minister is the question? 

HOPEFULLY, it was not for 'some deals' or to be used as a 'potential threat in the event that they cease to be loyal to Anwar' - WE wont know WHY the DELAY - maybe Anwar Ibrahim and/or Communication Minister Fahmi Fadzil should TELL US...  

If something happens like 1MDB, and now Tabung Haji, the Malaysian people and PARLIAMENT deserves to know soon as possible - NO COVER UP Please.

It must be noted that Pakatan Harapan government is not implicated as bonus payouts seems to be based on financial capabilities... 

However, the commission noted that from the beginning of the 2018 financial year to date, the granting of bonuses to employees has been controlled according to Tabung Haji’s financial capabilities.

BUT, then the RCI only looked until 2020 - so what is the situation of Tabung Haji and its many subsidiaries after that from 2021 to 2026 > do we need another RCI or maybe some Parliamentary Committee to look into this.

It is good to BAR active politicians from being appointed as Directors, CEOs or Management of Tabung Haji and its many subsidiaries > BUT better still NO MORE political appointees too. The selection should be the BEST CLEAN people to be Directors, CEO and management.

Anwar Ibrahim certainly do not have a track record of finding GOOD PEOPLE - not since his chosen POLITICAL Secretary has been charged in Court, and another past Political Secretary is subject to 'allegations' of wrongdoings. 

Maybe, Parliament should be the one vetting and approving persons to be appointed Directors,CEOs, etc of Tabung Haji, its subsidiaries...and in fact all GLCs, government Commissions like MACC and MCMC. Independent vetting and approval needed also for all law enforcement heads, Public Prosecutor ...

Even when it comes to RCI - the Commissioners must be INDEPENDENTLY selected ...and the COMMISSIONS OF ENQUIRY ACT 1950 (REVISED 1973) need to amended to make it MANDATORY that the findings of the RCI must be forthwith published and made available to the PUBLIC > No more 'SECRETS' and no more DELAYS in informing the Public the findings of any RCI. 

 

 

### The text in purple above are from AI search results - which also cites sources, but AI results can be wrong > so best check and verify please  

Tabung Haji RCI report declassified - Fahmi

By Hakim Mahari

July 29, 2026 @ 2:25pm

KUALA LUMPUR: The Cabinet today agreed to declassify and release the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) report into Tabung Haji, ending years of speculation over findings into the pilgrims fund's management between 2014 and 2020.

Government spokesman Datuk Seri Fahmi Fadzil said the decision was made after the Cabinet received a briefing from Tabung Haji's top management and deliberated on the RCI findings.

He said the report would be made public today and would also be tabled and debated at a special Dewan Rakyat sitting in the near future.

"The Cabinet noted that the report contains 25 recommendations for improvements, of which 75 per cent have already been implemented by Tabung Haji's management," Fahmi said in a statement today.

He said the Cabinet had also agreed for enforcement agencies to immediately begin comprehensive investigations based on the report.

"Parties involved will be brought to court if there are any violations of the law," he said.

Fahmi, who is also Communications Minister, said the Cabinet also took note that Tabung Haji had declared a 3.5 per cent profit distribution for the 2025 financial year, reflecting an improved financial and operational position.

Earlier, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim confirmed that the Cabinet had discussed the release of the RCI report.

When approached by reporters after attending the GBA-Asean Conference on Energy Transition and Integration at Sunway Resort Hotel, Anwar replied briefly: "Yes, yes."

The government had previously indicated that the decision on whether to publish the report would be made by the Cabinet.

Last week, Anwar said the report could be released immediately if Cabinet approval was not required, but indicated that the matter would be decided at the Cabinet meeting.

He said the release had previously been delayed as Tabung Haji was still undergoing financial recovery, with the government seeking to avoid undermining public confidence or alarming depositors.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Religious Affairs) Datuk Dr Zulkifli Hasan had earlier told the Dewan Negara that the proposal to publish the RCI report would be presented to the Cabinet for a final decision.

The RCI was established in 2021 to investigate Tabung Haji's management and operations following concerns over its financial position, including an estimated RM11 billion gap between its assets and liabilities, as well as alleged breaches of the Tabung Haji Act.

Following the 2018 general election, government reviews found that Tabung Haji had RM70.3 billion in assets against RM74.4 billion in liabilities as at Dec 31, 2017.

The government also raised concerns that profit distributions had continued despite liabilities exceeding assets.

As part of efforts to restore the institution's financial position, underperforming assets were transferred to Urusharta Jamaah Sdn Bhd, a special-purpose vehicle wholly owned by the Minister of Finance Incorporated, under a restructuring exercise approved by the government. NST, 29/7/2026

RCI: Governance failures, politics, 'creative accounting' led to Tabung Haji's financial crisis

Alyaa Alhadjri

Published:  Jul 29, 2026 9:38 PM

⋅

Updated: 11:08 P

The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Lembaga Tabung Haji has identified serious governance failures, political interference, and questionable accounting practices that contributed to the pilgrimage fund’s financial difficulties between 2014 and 2020.

In its report, the six-member commission chaired by former chief justice Raus Sharif said weaknesses in the Tabung Haji Act 1995 gave excessive powers to the minister in charge of religious affairs, particularly over appointments to the fund’s board and senior management.

The absence of clear qualification and expertise requirements allowed active politicians to become involved in the institution’s management, undermining its credibility and influencing decisions over hibah payments and financial assistance.

The RCI panel also recommended amending the law to prohibit active politicians from holding leadership positions in Tabung Haji or its subsidiaries.

It also proposed specific selection criteria for board members, including relevant professional experience and expertise.

Wearing many, many hats

The report found that board members and senior executives frequently held positions as directors or chairpersons of numerous subsidiary companies.

This divided their attention from their core responsibilities and created conflicts of interest, it said.

The report named Tabung Haji’s former board member and CEO, Ismee Ismail, who held positions in seven Tabung Haji subsidiaries and three more after his tenure ended in June 2016.

It also named another former board member, Johan Abdullah, who also served as the group managing director and Tabung Haji CEO from June 2016 to June 2018.

He was found to have held positions in 19 subsidiary companies.

Former board member Zukri Samat, who also served as the group managing director and Tabung Haji CEO between July 2018 and August 2019, was found to hold positions in four subsidiaries.

“The commission was informed by Zukri that he had relinquished those positions to avoid a conflict of interest while leading the management of Tabung Haji,” the report said.

Nik Hasyudeen Yusoff, who was a board member, group managing director, and Tabung Haji CEO between Sept 1, 2019 and May 5, 2021, was found to be involved in four subsidiaries.

The RCI found that Amrin Awaluddin, who has been serving as a Tabung Haji board member, group managing director, and CEO since May 6 to date, holds positions in three subsidiaries.

Rozaida Omar, who served as Tabung Haji’s senior general manager (finance) and group chief financial officer from August 2004 to April 2021 before being reappointed as general manager of its human capital department, also acted as its proxy representative in 21 subsidiaries during her tenure as senior general manager (finance).

Abd Kadir Sahlan, who was Tabung Haji’s chief investment officer from June 2010 to 2018, was found to be a board member in three Tabung Haji subsidiaries.

‘Creative accounting’

The RCI said Tabung Haji faced a serious financial crisis in 2017, which was aggravated by what it described as “creative accounting”.

Among others, the institution allegedly applied inconsistent impairment policies and failed to record substantial losses to support the payment of high hibah between 2014 and 2017, during which Baling MP Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim was in charge, and Najib Abdul Razak was prime minister.

This included RM227.81 million in impairments involving subsidiaries that were not recognised in its accounts.

The practices contributed to a widening gap between Tabung Haji’s assets and liabilities, the report said.

No names were mentioned in the orders relating to the creative accounting.

The commission also criticised shortcomings in regulatory and audit oversight.

It said the auditor-general was not sufficiently assertive in auditing Tabung Haji’s financial statements, particularly over an “emphasis of matter” in the 2017 accounts that should have been treated as a serious case of non-compliance.

Bank Negara Malaysia’s supervision of the institution was also found to be inconsistent with the provisions of the Tabung Haji Act.

Loss-making investments

The RCI highlighted several investments that resulted in significant losses and recommended forensic audits.

These included investments involving PT TH Indo Plantations, TH Properties Sdn Bhd, and FGV Holdings Bhd.

The report said some investments were pursued under Tabung Haji’s ambition to become a “pillar of the ummah’s economy”, despite the institution lacking sufficient expertise in sectors such as large-scale plantations and property development.

It recommended that Tabung Haji concentrate on fund management and avoid high-risk or strategic investments outside its core competencies.

The commission also proposed dividing ministerial oversight of the institution.

Under the recommendation, the religious affairs minister would be responsible for haj operations, while the finance minister would oversee investments and fund management.

An independent body should also be established to advise the prime minister on appointments to the Tabung Haji board, the report said.

Private auditors proposed

The report recommended that Tabung Haji appoint private accounting firms instead of relying on the auditor-general to audit its financial statements.

It said hibah payments should only be approved based on completed and audited annual financial statements, rather than provisional or pro forma (provided as a matter of courtesy) accounts.

The RCI also proposed establishing a dedicated haj fund to manage haj-related investments under the supervision of the Securities Commission.

To address rising haj costs, the commission recommended increasing the minimum savings required for depositors to qualify for the pilgrimage.

It also said haj subsidies should be targeted only at depositors who genuinely require financial assistance.

The report called for forensic audits into previous investments and for disciplinary or legal action to be taken against board members or senior executives found to have committed wrongdoing.

The RCI concluded that Tabung Haji’s existing institutional structure should be maintained, but said its governance and operations required urgent and fundamental reforms to protect depositors’ savings and ensure its long-term sustainability.

The RCI panel also comprises former chief secretary to the government Samsudin Osman, RHB Group founder Abdul Rashid Hussain, Cariasean Research and Advocacy chairperson Munir Abdul Majid, Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Sultan Abdul Halim Mu’adzam Shah vice-chancellor Asmadi Mohamed Naim, and certified accountant Norsyahrin Hamidon.

The commission’s secretary was then-Jakim deputy director-general for policy Hakimah Yusoff.

It was also assisted by three conducting officers from the Attorney-General’s Chambers - Asmah Musa, Nazran Sham, and Budiman Lutfi Mohamed. - Malaysiakini, 29/7/2026

Tabung Haji must recover RM2.19m bonuses paid without proper approval: RCI

Yiswaree Palansamy

Published:  Jul 30, 2026 7:00 AM

⋅

Updated: 6:47 A

The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Tabung Haji has called for the recovery of RM2.19 million in bonuses paid to selected directors and officers of TH Properties Sdn Bhd, after finding that they were approved without following the required legal procedures.

In its 252-page report released last night, the RCI said bonus payments made by TH Properties in 2017 and 2018 had breached provisions under the Companies Act 2016, as the necessary approvals and shareholder resolutions were not obtained.

According to the report, TH Properties in 2020 consulted law firm MD Tajuddin & Co regarding the bonus payments in 2017 and 2018.

The commission said it agreed with the firm’s legal opinion that the 2017 payments by the TH Properties board had violated Sections 230(2) and 230(4) of the Companies Act 2016, while the 2018 payments had breached Section 230(3) of the same Act.

“The commission examined documents and meeting minutes relating to the issue of bonus payments to members of the board and certain employees of TH Properties.

“The bonus payments given to members of the TH Properties board and certain employees in 2017 and 2018 were made on the grounds that development projects in Australia, particularly The Bay Pavilion, had made significant financial contributions to TH Properties in 2016 and 2017,” it said.

The report added that the project was claimed to have generated returns of A$11.6 million (about RM35 million) for TH Properties.

“The commission found that several selected individuals were given special bonuses amounting to RM1,148,400 in 2017 and RM1,045,000 in 2018.

“The commission therefore recommends that efforts be made to recover the bonuses that were given to those involved, as the said bonuses were granted without complying with the prescribed regulations,” the report read.

The commission found that the bonuses were approved for two directors, two former directors, and six officers.

Excessive bonuses

The commission’s review also found that bonuses given to Tabung Haji employees were extremely high from 2010 to 2017, ranging between two and 13 months, including annual and special bonuses.

“The commission’s examination found that the bonus payment process went through three levels of approval, namely the board, the religious affairs minister, and the Finance Ministry.

“Generally, the religious affairs minister and Finance Ministry would only receive bonus payment proposals as recommended by Tabung Haji management and the board.

“This included the proposal for an extraordinary bonus payment in 2014, at a rate of one to 11 months’ salary for the annual bonus and two months’ salary for the special bonus, with the overall amount potentially reaching 13 months’ salary, involving an allocation of RM74 million,” the report read.

It added that the Finance Ministry had explained to the RCI that bonus payments for Tabung Haji employees exceeding two months were subject to the minister’s consideration and discretion.

This took into account, among others, Tabung Haji’s financial performance, operational activities, financial obligations, investment performance compared with previous years, the productivity performance of its members, and the financial implications of paying bonuses.

It also considered the recommendations of the board and the religious affairs minister.

“The commission is of the view that, taking into account the financial issues faced by Tabung Haji from 2014 to 2017, where the value of assets was lower than liabilities as reported in the annual financial statements and acknowledged by the National Audit Department, this proves that the granting of high bonuses by Tabung Haji was inappropriate,” the report read.

It explained that the high bonuses were granted because Tabung Haji assessed its assets based on real asset value, which showed it had recorded substantial profits throughout those years.

However, the commission noted that from the beginning of the 2018 financial year to date, the granting of bonuses to employees has been controlled according to Tabung Haji’s financial capabilities. - Malaysiakini, 30/7/2026