Beyond KLIA: Unpacking Malaysia's systemic migration challenges
The act of "counter-setting" which involves corruption at borders is a well-recognised enabler of both human trafficking and migrant smuggling. Thus, "counter setting" is not just negligence, it is an institutional gateway for illicit entry under the guise of administrative authority.
Under the UN Trafficking Protocol (Palermo Protocol) and Malaysia's Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 (ATIPSOM), human trafficking consists of three essential elements: Act (e.g., recruitment, transportation), Means (e.g., coercion, fraud, abuse of power), and Purpose (e.g., exploitation such as forced labour or sexual servitude).
As studies has established, most trafficking victims enter Malaysia legally which means that they are in possession of valid passport and are even given a 30-day visa free entry if they are from Southeast Asian countries.
By contrast, migrant smuggling involves consensual facilitation of unlawful entry in exchange for financial gain.
In addition, it is extremely difficult for individuals to board international flights to Malaysia without valid travel documents. This may not necessarily be the case when entering Malaysia through land.
For example, Malaysia's land borders especially in areas such as Rantau Panjang, Sungai Golok, and Wang Kelian are far more porous. In Wang Kelian, a one-kilometre "no man's land" separates Thai and Malaysian posts, making unsupervised crossings possible
Malaysia's fluctuating labour policies such as the temporary freeze (and subsequent lifting) on the intake of Bangladeshi workers for example, have created a market of desperation. One major concern is the licensing regime.
In Malaysia, work agents are not required to possess individual licences. Some agents operate without registration; others exploit legal platforms while engaging in parallel black-market operations.
Disturbingly, many such agents are foreign nationals already residing in Malaysia, which helps them gain the trust of vulnerable migrant communities.
Malaysia must move beyond reactive enforcement and address the systemic factors that enable counter setting and migration-related abuse.
A rights-based and reform-oriented strategy should include stricter employer vetting procedures and meaningful penalties for labour exploitation; crackdowns on unlicensed and unscrupulous agents, including those operating under legal facades; enhance institutional oversight across border enforcement agencies to prevent corruption; implement a victim-centred approach that treats irregular entrants as potential victims unless complicity is proven; and ratify the UN Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all migrant workers and members of their families.
The KLIA "counter setting" scandal exposes systemic cracks in Malaysia's migration governance, labour recruitment processes, and institutional safeguards.
While prosecuting offenders is necessary, structural reforms must follow to protect migrants' rights and preserve the integrity of our borders.
Criminologist and Senior Lecturer
Faculty of Law, University Malaya
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
37 minutes ago
- New Straits Times
Afghan family with fake visas detained after spending 4 days wandering inside KLIA
SEPANG: A family of four Afghan nationals who spent four days wandering inside the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) terminal was denied entry into Malaysia after authorities discovered they were attempting to enter the country using fake visas. The group — consisting of one man and three adult women — arrived at KLIA on July 24 at 9.20pm via Emirates flight EK342 but failed to report to the immigration checkpoint upon arrival. In a statement, the Malaysian Border Control and Protection Agency (MCBA) said the family's prolonged and suspicious presence at the terminal caught the attention of officers from the KLIA Terminal 1 Monitoring Unit. "The four were among 132 foreign nationals screened during a document inspection and monitoring operation at the airport," it said. Investigations revealed the individuals were "stranded passengers", a term used to describe travellers who enter the country but do not report to immigration within the stipulated time. During interrogation, the group admitted they had been living inside the terminal for four days without undergoing immigration clearance. "Further checks on their travel documents revealed that all four visas were forged. The family later confessed they had never been to Uzbekistan, which was listed as their supposed transit country. They told authorities the counterfeit visas had been obtained from an agent for USD6,000 (RM25,386)," the agency said. MBCA confirmed that all four individuals have been issued Not To Land (NTL) notices and are scheduled to be deported to Afghanistan on Wednesday via Emirates Airlines. "This incident underscores our ongoing commitment to preventing the entry of foreign nationals using forged documents," it added. The agency also reminded the public and travellers that strict action will be taken against any attempts to bypass Malaysia's immigration laws through fraudulent means.
New Straits Times
3 hours ago
- New Straits Times
DPA is not a 'get-out-of-jail-free card', says MACC chief
KUALA LUMPUR: A Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) is not a get-out-of-jail-free card but an agreement where the prosecution may defer criminal charges under terms and conditions that must be complied with, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission said. MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki said individuals under investigation will still face prosecution based on the offences already committed. "A DPA is not a shortcut or solution to avoid court charges. The aim is not to bypass justice, but to provide an alternative procedure. "If negotiations for a DPA fail, the legal entity will still be brought to court for the offences committed," he said. A DPA is an agreement between the prosecution and an organisation or company involved in major corruption offences. Under this agreement, prosecution may be deferred if the entity agrees to fulfil specific terms and conditions. Indirectly, a DPA enables the recovery of assets and funds more quickly, especially in large-scale cases involving significant sums, and avoids lengthy, complex trials that require substantial costs and resources. It is expected to strengthen the MACC Act 2009, which currently relies on Sections 40 and 41, or Sections 55 and 56 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLATFAPUAA 2001). Berita Harian had reported that the proposal to introduce DPA into national enforcement legislation, particularly anti-corruption law, had received mixed reactions regarding its strengths and weaknesses. While some believe the DPA could expedite the recovery of stolen public funds, others were concerned it may become a 'get-out-of-jail-free card' for the wealthy and well-connected. Anti-corruption analyst and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) law professor Prof Dr Salawati Mat Basir described the DPA as a suitable alternative for the swift recovery of misappropriated public funds. Senior lawyer and former deputy public prosecutor Fahmi Abd Moin supported the proposal to amend the MACC Act, saying it provides the commission with more options to reclaim funds lost to corruption or abuse of power by entities under investigation. However, senior lawyer Datuk Amer Hamzah Arshad voiced concern that the DPA could become a loophole for the elite and influential to escape criminal convictions, as it allows those involved to avoid publicly pleading guilty in court. Azam previously said the DPA would be introduced through amendments to the MACC Act 2009, expected to be tabled in Parliament by mid-next year. He said that under the DPA, the business entities involved would be required to fulfil several conditions, including returning misappropriated funds or assets, paying penalties or fines, and complying with conditions set by enforcement authorities and the Attorney-General's Chambers.
Focus Malaysia
18 hours ago
- Focus Malaysia
Is KLIA 'counter setting' a symptom of deeper migrant exploitation?
THE recent detention of an enforcement officer at Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) Terminal 1 has renewed public scrutiny over a clandestine practice known as 'counter setting'. This tactic, where individuals are allowed to bypass formal immigration procedures, raises serious concerns not only regarding border security and official corruption but also about structural vulnerabilities in Malaysia's migration management, labour demands and institutional accountability. Last November, nearly 50 immigration officers were reassigned following investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) into a similar syndicate operating at KLIA. A senior immigration officer, believed to be the mastermind behind the network, is expected to face charges over a human trafficking ring that allegedly facilitated the unlawful entry of foreign nationals without immigration clearance. The act of 'counter-setting' which involves corruption at borders is a well-recognised enabler of both human trafficking and migrant smuggling. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) identifies bribery and abuse of power as systemic 'pull factors' that facilitate transnational crime. In this context, 'counter setting' is not just negligence, it is an institutional gateway for illicit entry under the guise of administrative authority. However, criminalising rogue officers should not automatically lead to the assumption that all individuals who passed through these compromised checkpoints are victims of trafficking or knowingly complicit in smuggling. Trafficking vs. smuggling Public discourse frequently conflates 'migration', 'trafficking' and 'smuggling' as either criminal or victimhood, obscuring nuanced legal distinctions. Under both the UN Trafficking Protocol (Palermo Protocol) and Malaysia's Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 (ATIPSOM), human trafficking consists of three essential elements: Act (e.g., recruitment, transportation), Means (e.g., coercion, fraud, abuse of power), and Purpose (e.g., exploitation such as forced labour or sexual servitude). However, ATIPSOM does not clearly criminalise attempts to traffic nor does it automatically recognise someone as a trafficked person simply because they entered the country irregularly. As studies have established, most trafficking victims enter Malaysia legally which means that they are in possession of valid passport and are even given a 30-day visa free entry if they are from Southeast Asian countries. Therefore, it is nearly impossible to establish the key component of 'exploitation' unless it is evidently demonstrated at the border entry. Mere facilitation without evidence of exploitation does not constitute trafficking. By contrast, migrant smuggling involves consensual facilitation of unlawful entry in exchange for financial gain. Once the border is crossed, the smuggling transaction ends. In such cases, the migrant is typically treated as an offender who have breached immigration laws. An individual's status only becomes 'irregular' if immigration officers on arrival fail to stamp or process their entry. This administrative omission does not by itself amount to criminal conduct or evidence of trafficking. This brings us to a critical question: how can authorities establish that the individuals who entered via 'counter setting' were trafficked, smuggled, or simply irregular migrants? Without evidence of coercion or exploitation, these individuals remain at best suspects or irregular entrants. As many of us has experienced, it is extremely difficult for individuals to board international flights to Malaysia without valid travel documents. Multiple layers of checks include immigration clearance at the point of departure, airline document verification, and pre-boarding checks by flight crew. This may not necessarily be the case when entering Malaysia through land. For example, Malaysia's land borders especially in areas such as Rantau Panjang, Sungai Golok and Wang Kelian are far more porous. In Wang Kelian, a one-kilometre 'no man's land' separates Thai and Malaysian posts, making unsupervised crossings possible. Arrests involving undocumented Myanmar nationals and the unregulated movement of Malaysians into Thailand highlight systemic gaps in surveillance and border management. Labour agents and recruitment networks Malaysia's fluctuating labour policies such as the temporary freeze (and subsequent lifting) on the intake of Bangladeshi workers, for example, have created a market of desperation. To fulfil recruitment contracts or avoid refunding fees, unscrupulous agents may resort to corrupt arrangements with enforcement personnel to smuggle workers into the country. One major concern is the licensing regime. In Malaysia, work agents are not required to possess individual licences. Licences are tied to agencies, creating a regulatory blind spot. Some agents operate without registration; others exploit legal platforms while engaging in parallel black-market operations. Disturbingly, many such agents are foreign nationals already residing in Malaysia, which helps them gain the trust of vulnerable migrant communities. Upon arrival, many of these migrants are placed in overcrowded accommodation and squalid conditions. They are also subjected to long hours of work, meagre pay, and minimal legal protection. While exploitative, these conditions do not always rise to the legal threshold of trafficking unless all the trafficking elements are clearly present. Malaysia must move beyond reactive enforcement and address the systemic factors that enable counter setting and migration-related abuse. A rights-based and reform-oriented strategy should include stricter employer vetting procedures and meaningful penalties for labour exploitation as well as crackdowns on unlicensed and unscrupulous agents, including those operating under legal facades, among others. Conclusively, it is evident that the KLIA 'counter setting' scandal is not just about corrupt officers, it exposes systemic cracks in Malaysia's migration governance, labour recruitment processes, and institutional safeguards. While prosecuting offenders is necessary, structural reforms must follow to protect migrants' rights and preserve the integrity of our borders. To strike a balance between national security and human dignity, Malaysia must clearly distinguish between 'victims', 'offenders', and 'irregular migrants' and, above all, recognise the human realities behind each case. ‒ July 28, 2025 Dr Haezreena Begum Abdul Hamid is a Criminologist and Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Law, University of Malaya. The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia. Main image: Malaysiakini
