Wednesday, October 23, 2024

The buzz around house arrest









Published: Oct 23, 2024 11:05 AM


COMMENT | House arrest has been the topic for many having a chat in the neighbourhood warung, kopitiam, and other watering holes around the country. The average Malaysian has already jumped on the speculation train that this new bill and the discussion around house arrest intends to benefit one man.

I don’t have to name him because I’m fairly certain he has named himself in the recent past; he ought to have been under house arrest as opposed to prison.

In principle, I am supportive of the expansion of house arrest and other forms of restrictions outside of the prison system. We know how our prisons have been overwhelmed with overpopulation over the past few decades.

There are only two ways to deal with this problem and that is to ensure fewer people are sent to prison and people who leave do not return there, ever.

Before I go any further on this policy or potential legislation, let me clarify the “other form of restrictions”. This could include restrictions against a person travelling outside of permitted areas such as their workplace and home, as opposed to being locked up in detention, and in Malaysia, this would likely come with electronic monitoring devices.


Tackling prison overpopulation

Malaysia has an extremely punitive criminal justice system. We have an obsession with corporal punishment and imprisonment. Stories of disproportionate punishment and imprisonment of the poor are not unheard of.

We have had migrants who were illegally caned, we have seen single mothers imprisoned for stealing milk powder, and we all know how a single mother surviving off a small-time drug trade has been sentenced to death.





The vindictiveness of the criminal justice system has resulted in an ever-growing prison population. While having a broader ambit for house arrest would resolve some of these challenges, it will not put an end to it as it is nothing more than a stopgap for the Prisons Department.

While imprisonment fosters a sense of safety for the broader society, rampant and unrestrained use of imprisonment does not solve the root cause of crime and tends to come back and haunt us.

Some have described the prison as the “university for crimes”, and those who enter tend to come out further emboldened by their experience and the knowledge accrued while incarcerated. While there is some truth to this, we must not forget the impact of imprisonment and how it forces some further into a life of crime.

When we brand the person as a convict or prisoner, they carry that title for the rest of their life. The notoriety that comes with it eliminates any chance for them to reintegrate into society without explicit and overt discrimination.

When we keep an offender out of prison, the point is not to ignore the crime committed, but to give them a better platform to learn from their mistake, reform themselves and make amends with the victim or society.

For this to be effective, it should not apply to everyone, nor should it exclude anyone on principle. To put it simply, it needs to prioritise those who are seeking forgiveness and a chance to better themselves.

Considering how few alternatives we have in our criminal justice system, I do think it is a good idea to give this alternative to prison a chance and explore the best way to implement them in Malaysia.


Won’t Najib benefit from this?

I had some time to think about former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s release, and I wondered: What would people have said about house arrest if it had been Anwar Ibrahim?

He was imprisoned in 1999 and 2015. He was not particularly young and he suffered from chronic health issues. If there was an option for house arrest, I’d reckon most activists and politicians would have demanded for him to be moved out of prison into house arrest.

It is the right thing to do considering his age and health complications.




Any policy on house arrest needs to be well-studied and developed based on practical experience from the Prisons Department and NGOs providing shelters and halfway homes.

I do not think anyone in government is crazy enough to develop this around Najib alone, but this does not mean Najib will not benefit from it.

Should it be different because it is Najib and not Anwar?



DOBBY CHEW is CEO of Hayat, a human rights organisation based in Kuala Lumpur. Hayat, which means life in Malay, is committed to community mobilisation and advocacy on the right to life and other intersectional issues.


1 comment:

  1. Many of those convicted criminals definitely must be separated out of society, given the vicious and heartless actions they carried out in commiting their crime.

    Many of their victims face long term or permanent injury to body or mind.

    Even so-called "non-violent:" criminals have been guilty of vicious actions that have seriously harmed their victims, financially or psychologically, even if they did not physically attack their victim.

    Najib actions definitely harmed Malaysia in many ways, and he deserves to be physically incarcerated , with the process of law that he has been given access to.

    ReplyDelete