Critics and human rights advocates have expressed significant concerns regarding the government's new refugee management mechanism, particularly the lack of transparency surrounding the updated National Security Council (NSC) Directive No. 23. Despite the government's claims of improved efficiency, the fact that the directive remains unpublished has fueled fears that the system may prioritize security over the fundamental rights of refugees. Observers warn that without clear, public-facing legal protections, the new registration system could inadvertently expose vulnerable individuals to increased risks of detention, harassment, or forced return.
There is also skepticism regarding the government's ability to manage the process fairly. Critics point out that the transition away from UNHCR-led registration raises questions about whether the new system will adhere to international standards for refugee status determination. If the government's primary focus remains on deportation and enforcement, there is a risk that the DPP programme could be used as a tool for surveillance rather than protection. Advocacy groups have urged the government to amend the Immigration Act to ensure that the registration document provides genuine legal protection against arrest and prosecution.
Furthermore, some observers worry that the government's rhetoric on 'burden-sharing' and 'security' may be masking a lack of long-term commitment to refugee welfare. The slow pace of the registration process, with only a small number of individuals processed in the initial months, suggests that the system may not be equipped to handle the scale of the population. Critics argue that until the government establishes a transparent, rights-based legal framework that includes clear safeguards against data misuse and arbitrary detention, the new mechanism will fail to address the core challenges faced by refugees in Malaysia.