Parliament should not expand legal protection for prison officers

MALAYSIA’S Parliament is considering the introduction of a new section, Section 63A, into the Prisons Act 1995, which would grant statutory protection from legal proceedings to prison officers and other persons acting under the direction of the Commissioner-General for acts undertaken in "good faith" and with a "reasonable belief" that they were necessary.

Suaram is deeply concerned that this amendment comes just one month after the public inquiry by the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) into a violent incident on Jan 17, 2025, at Taiping Prison concluded that serious human rights violations had occurred.

(The violence was preceded by a peaceful sit-in by detainees appealing not to be transferred to Block E... some of them had lived there before and shared first-hand accounts of poor sanitation, dilapidated infrastructure, delayed requests for medications, and restrictions on recreation and bathing. One detainee, Gan Chin Eng, suffered internal injuries and died. – Previous Suaram report/Malaysian Bar press release)

Among Suhakam’s findings were excessive physical violence by prison officers, abuse of batons and pepper spray, degrading treatment of detainees, negligence by senior prison management, failures to provide adequate medical treatment, falsification of medical records, failures by the Royal Malaysia Police to investigate violence committed by prison officers, and delays by the Attorney General's Chambers in reviewing investigation papers and initiating prosecutions.

In response, Suhakam recommended disciplinary action against prison officers, independent investigations, improvements to prison oversight and healthcare, measures to address overcrowding, and Malaysia's accession to the Convention Against Torture (Uncat).

Against this backdrop, the proposed Section 63A raises serious concerns. Rather than responding to the findings of the Taiping Prison public inquiry by strengthening oversight and ensuring effective remedies for victims, Parliament is being asked to consider a provision that grants statutory protection from legal proceedings to prison officers. These are broad legal concepts that may be relied upon precisely in situations involving the use of force and prison security – the very circumstances examined by the inquiry.

The proposed amendment also risks blanket immunity that cannot be overcome. This will constitute a major obstacle for victims in their pursuit of justice and weaken public confidence and accountability within Malaysia's prison system.

Malaysia has repeatedly expressed its commitment to institutional reform. These commitments require effective investigations, access to justice, and meaningful remedies for victims – not broader statutory protections that risk shielding state actors from scrutiny.

Suaram therefore calls on Members of Parliament to:

> Withdraw the proposed Section 63A from the Prisons (Amendment) Bill 2026.

> Prioritise the implementation of the recommendations arising from Suhakam's Taiping Prison Public Inquiry, including disciplinary action, independent investigations, and structural reforms to address overcrowding and prison conditions.

> Expedite Malaysia's accession to Uncat and introduce comprehensive anti-torture legislation to strengthen protections and oversight across all places of detention.

The true measure of prison reform is not how well it protects institutions from scrutiny, but how effectively it protects the dignity, rights, and lives of those deprived of their liberty and ensures accountability for abuses committed by state officials.

AZURA NASRON

Executive director

Suaram (Suara Rakyat Malaysia)