Malaysia Enabling Environment Baseline Snapshot

The year 2024 marked the midpoint of the Anwar-led Unity Government’s term. This period was increasingly shaped by a gap between reform promises and political realities. The government spoke strongly against corruption on the international stage. However, this stance clashed with selective outcomes in key domestic cases involving figures linked to the coalition government. At the same time, progress on institutional reforms remained slow. Key efforts— like separating the roles of Attorney General and Public Prosecutor, and introducing a Political Financing Bill—remained slow-moving. Domestically, heightened sensitivities around race, religion, and royalty (3R) continued to shape the national political narrative. Isolated incidents such as the ‘Allah socks’ and Vern’s shoes controversies generated polarised responses, further reinforcing government narratives around the need to regulate speech on 3R. This environment underpinned the passage of restrictive laws such as the Communications and Multimedia Act amendments. Meanwhile, peaceful assembly remained shaped by an approval-based logic, where conditions such as police notification or local authority 'permission' were used to restrict protests. Protests involving politically sensitive issues continued to face heightened scrutiny. Malaysia continues to be classified as a 'problematic' environment for press freedom, according to the RSF World Press Freedom Index. While its overall score improved by 4.02 points from 2024 to 2025, the country remains under the 'Obstructed' category in the CIVICUS Monitor, reflecting ongoing challenges to media and civic space. While the government remained steadfast in its advocacy internationally for the Palestinian cause, domestic policies grew more exclusionary. The forced evictions of the Bajau Laut community and the passage of regressive constitutional amendments on citizenship starkly illustrated this dissonance. Refugees and asylum seekers, including those with UNHCR cards, continued to lack legal status, no right to work, and persistent risks of arrest, as government rhetoric consistently framed refugee protection as an act of humanitarian discretion, not a binding obligation.