Event Summary
On 13 February 2025, the Prime Minister announced amendments to the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) with an immediate moratorium effectively halting the police investigations opened on 9 February 2025 against the so-called “SOSMA” hunger strike participants, referring to the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 under which individuals are held.
The events leading up to this announcement began on 8 and 9 February 2025, when Malaysian authorities violated the rights of 50 family members of detainees held under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA). During their peaceful hunger strike outside Sungai Buloh Prison, authorities imposed barbed wire barricades and heavy policing, forcing the protesters to demonstrate along a high-traffic main road, exposing them to significant safety risks. The family members were highlighting issues faced by their relatives in custody, including delayed trials.
On 9 February 2025, the Prisons Department assured the family members of an appointment with the Home Ministry the next day. However, upon arrival, they were denied entry and forced to wait outside for 2.5 hours. Frustrated, they pushed past security officers into the complex and were only granted an audience with the Home Minister’s press secretary three hours after the scheduled appointment. No assurance was given regarding their demand for a Home Ministry visit to the detainees. Instead, the police on 12 February 2025 arrested Sevan Doraisamy, the Executive Director of SUARAM, a civil society organization involved in seeking the Home Minister’s audience, using Section 7 of the Protected Areas and Protected Places Act for unauthorized entry into the Home Ministry compound. The following day, SUARAM’s Programme Manager Azura Nasron and a family member, Durga Devi, were also questioned under the same provision.
Despite clear video evidence of Sevan’s arrest, the police and Home Ministry denied the arrest, claiming he was merely “called in” for questioning. On 9 February 2025, the police opened an investigation under the PAA against the hunger strike participants. However, this was halted on 13 February 2025 when the Prime Minister announced the amendments and moratorium, highlighting the government’s response to the longstanding concerns over civic freedoms and police intimidation in Malaysia.
This decision came in response to the increasing weaponization of law and police intimidation to restrict civic freedoms in Malaysia. This development presents significant opportunities for improving the enabling environment for civil society, as the proposed amendment would remove the requirements for rally organisers to obtain permission from a venue owner.
The 2025 hunger strike reflects ongoing frustration over denial of right to fair trial for detainees due to the enforcement of SOSMA, as well as its socioeconomic impact on the detainees’ families. Similar concerns were raised during a hunger strike outside the same prison in 2023. That same year, then Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Ramkarpal Singh took the initiative to engage stakeholders, including NGOs and SOSMA detainees, on SOSMA amendments, leading to a set of recommendations submitted to the Home Ministry. Despite these interventions, no meaningful reforms followed, and the same grievances remained unresolved in 2025.
Beyond the lack of progress on SOSMA, the response to the 2025 hunger strike also reflected a shift in how policymakers engage with affected families. In 2023, Ramkarpal personally met family members outside Sungai Buloh Prison whilst the hunger strike was ongoing, signalling a willingness to engage. In contrast, in 2025, family members had to end their hunger strike and travel to the Home Ministry to submit their memorandum. This shift in engagement was also accompanied by increased efforts to hinder the right to peaceful assembly, via the use of barbed wire barricades outside the prison this year and obstruction of family members by security staff from entering the Home Ministry complex. The arrest and questioning under the Protected Areas and Protected Places Act marked an escalation in the use of legal provisions to intimidate activists and civilians exercising their fundamental right to peaceful assembly – going beyond the usual reliance on the PAA.