KUALA LUMPUR – The recent death of a five-year-old boy in Johor Baru due to alleged abuse by his mother and stepfather has prompted the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) to question why he and his two siblings were still in the couple’s care, even when they had already been charged.
In a statement, Suhakam conveyed its children’s commissioner Prof Datuk Noor Aziah Mohd Awal’s view that the children should have been removed and placed in a safer environment by any protector, assistant protector, or police officer.
It said the couple – who live in Taman Nusa Bestari – had a prior case under Section 31(1)(a) of the Child Act 2001 for child neglect, and Section 15(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 for drug abuse.
The other two children are a girl and a boy aged eight and two respectively.
“The commissioner is puzzled as to why the five-year-old boy and his two other siblings were still in the couple’s care – even though they have been charged for child abuse of their eldest daughter, and the case is still pending,” said Suhakam, while conveying Noor Aziah’s sadness over the incident.
She called on the Women, Family, and Community Development Ministry to adopt proper approaches and measures to curb such issues in ensuring that all children are protected from any forms of violence.
“The Women, Family, and Community Development Ministry through the children’s division is urged to take appropriate intervention as to whether MoH (as protector) had been negligent in its supervision and exercising of its powers, as the former is responsible for the provision of care, protection, and rehabilitation of children to ensure their well-being.”
Suhakam added that child abuse and violence are persisting global concerns, including in Malaysia.
It said according to MoH statistics, there were 2,040 child abuse cases from January to April this year.
It noted the statistics show that biological mothers were reported to be the individuals responsible for most cases of child abuse, pointing to an increase in such incidents to 9.8% (148 cases) last year compared with 2019.
Suhakam said pursuant to Section 18 of the Child Act 2001, any protector, assistant protector, or police officer who is satisfied on reasonable grounds that a child is in need of care and protection may take the child into temporary custody.
The exception to this, is if the official is satisfied that undertaking proceedings in relation to the child is undesirable in the best interests of the child – or the proceedings are about to be taken by some other person.
It referred to Article 20(1) of the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child, which stated: “A child temporarily or permanently deprived of his or her family environment, or in whose own best interests cannot be allowed to remain in that environment, shall be entitled to special protection and assistance provided by the state.” – The Vibes, December 10, 2021
