
Selangor Immigration Dept detains 83 in Alam Megah warehouse raid
SHAH ALAM: The Immigration Department (JIM) detained 83 illegal immigrants in a raid on a storage warehouse in Alam Megah, Section 27 here today.
Selangor JIM director Khairrul Aminus Kamaruddin said they were among the 150 foreigners inspected under Op Sasar, which involved two premises that stored goods, from 10 am to noon.
He added that the illegal immigrants, aged between 22 and 50, were detained for various offences, including not having identification documents, violating their pass conditions, overstaying and being unrecognised cardholders.
Those detained, comprising 68 Myanmar nationals, 10 Bangladeshis and five Pakistanis, have been placed at the Semenyih Immigration Depot.
He told a media conference at the Selangor JIM office here today that a 48-year-old Malaysian, believed to be the manager of both premises, was also detained under Section 55B of the Immigration Act 1959/63 for employing illegal immigrants.
Khairrul Aminus said that preliminary investigations found that some of them used the United Nations High Commissioner For Refugees (UNHCR) card and violated work permits.
He said the case is being investigated under the Immigration Act 1959/63, Passports Act 1966, Immigration Regulations 1963 and the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007.
He urged the foreigners to join the Migrant Repatriation Programme 2.0, which began on May 19 and ends on April 30 next year, with a total payment of RM520 including fines and a special pass to return to their country of origin.
There are four Selangor JIM offices involved in the programme, namely in Shah Alam, Kelana Jaya, Port Klang and Kajang, he said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Sun
11 hours ago
- The Sun
Appeals Court set Aug 19 for decision in activist's appeal over challenge to online speech law
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has fixed August 19 to deliver its decision in an appeal brought by an activist over the dismissal of her lawsuit that had challenged the validity of parts of a provision in the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 that criminalises offensive online comments. A three-man bench consisting of Federal Court judge Datuk Lee Swee Seng and Court of Appeal judges Datuk Hashim Hamzah and Datuk Azman Abdullah set the decision date after parties completed their submissions earlier today. Heidy Quah Gaik Li, the founder of Refuge for Refugees is claiming the use of the words 'offensive' and annoy' in Section 233 of the Act are invalid as it goes against two fundamental human rights protected by the Federal Constitution. Section 233(1)(a) states that it is an offence for a person to make, create or solicit, and initiate the transmission of any online comment which is 'obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive' with 'intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person. In Sept 2023, the Shah Alam High Court dismissed Quah's lawsuit, leading her to file an appeal in the Court of Appeal. The hearing today was a continuation of proceedings that had begun earlier. Justice Lee was serving as a Court of Appeal judge before being elevated to the Federal Court in May this year. During today's hearing, senior federal counsel Liew Horng Bin representing the Malaysian government submitted that speech involving expletives, profanity, crude references, hate speech or incitement to violence are not expressions protected under Article 10 (1) (a) of the Federal Constitution. He argued that the right to free speech should be used to disseminate truth, respect for human dignity and perform essential informing function. On the other hand, lawyer Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, representing Quah argued the words 'offensive' or annoy contained in Section 233 is inconsistent with Article 10 and Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, namely the right to equality and freedom of speech. He argued that the two words in Section 233 are not a 'permissible restriction' under public order as prescribed in the Federal Constitution. In July 2021, Quah, 31, was charged in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court for allegedly making 'offensive' online comments in a Facebook post. In April the following year, the Sessions Court granted her a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) due to the charge under section 233(1)(a) being defective.


The Sun
11 hours ago
- The Sun
Court to rule Aug 19 on activist's challenge to CMA provision
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has fixed August 19 to deliver its decision in an appeal brought by an activist over the dismissal of her lawsuit that had challenged the validity of parts of a provision in the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 that criminalises offensive online comments. A three-man bench consisting of Federal Court judge Datuk Lee Swee Seng and Court of Appeal judges Datuk Hashim Hamzah and Datuk Azman Abdullah set the decision date after parties completed their submissions earlier today. Heidy Quah Gaik Li, the founder of Refuge for Refugees is claiming the use of the words 'offensive' and annoy' in Section 233 of the Act are invalid as it goes against two fundamental human rights protected by the Federal Constitution. Section 233(1)(a) states that it is an offence for a person to make, create or solicit, and initiate the transmission of any online comment which is 'obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive' with 'intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person. In Sept 2023, the Shah Alam High Court dismissed Quah's lawsuit, leading her to file an appeal in the Court of Appeal. The hearing today was a continuation of proceedings that had begun earlier. Justice Lee was serving as a Court of Appeal judge before being elevated to the Federal Court in May this year. During today's hearing, senior federal counsel Liew Horng Bin representing the Malaysian government submitted that speech involving expletives, profanity, crude references, hate speech or incitement to violence are not expressions protected under Article 10 (1) (a) of the Federal Constitution. He argued that the right to free speech should be used to disseminate truth, respect for human dignity and perform essential informing function. On the other hand, lawyer Datuk Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, representing Quah argued the words 'offensive' or annoy contained in Section 233 is inconsistent with Article 10 and Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, namely the right to equality and freedom of speech. He argued that the two words in Section 233 are not a 'permissible restriction' under public order as prescribed in the Federal Constitution. In July 2021, Quah, 31, was charged in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court for allegedly making 'offensive' online comments in a Facebook post. In April the following year, the Sessions Court granted her a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) due to the charge under section 233(1)(a) being defective.


New Straits Times
12 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Three foreign men rescued from wrongful confinement in Penang
GEORGE TOWN: Three foreign men were rescued from wrongful confinement during a police raid on an apartment here yesterday. The operation followed a report lodged by a 47-year-old foreign national, who claimed that his friends were being held against their will. Northeast district deputy police chief Superintendent Lee Swee Sake said the raid was conducted about 2pm. "Police successfully freed the three victims, aged between 28 and 52, all of whom were in good health," he said in a statement today. "During the same operation, three Malaysian men, aged 40 to 56, and a 40-year-old foreign woman were arrested. They are believed to have been guarding the victims in the apartment." The case is being investigated under Section 344 of the Penal Code for wrongful confinement. Lee said police had obtained a four-day remand order against the suspects from today until Saturday to facilitate further investigations. "We urge the public to refrain from speculating about the case to avoid jeopardising the ongoing investigation." Police are investigating when and why the victims were confined. The men have valid passports, though some have expired.