Critics of the government's approach argue that focusing on enforcement and the 'collusion' of locals ignores the deeper humanitarian crisis facing the Rohingya community. By framing the presence of refugees as primarily an administrative or land-use issue, critics suggest the state is failing to address the root causes of why these individuals are in Malaysia in the first place. They contend that the Rohingya, who are fleeing genocide and persecution in Myanmar, are often forced into informal settlements because they lack legal pathways to work or live securely, making them dependent on the very 'collusion' the government now seeks to punish.
Human rights advocates warn that the current rhetoric risks further stigmatizing a marginalized group and fueling xenophobia. They argue that instead of threatening those who provide shelter or employment, the government should focus on developing a comprehensive policy that provides legal protection and humanitarian support. Critics point out that enforcement-heavy strategies, such as demolitions and detentions, often result in families being displaced repeatedly without finding a long-term solution, which only perpetuates the cycle of poverty and instability.
Furthermore, there is concern that the government's focus on 'illegal' status ignores the international reality of the Rohingya plight. Critics argue that the state should work with international bodies to create sustainable resettlement or integration programs rather than treating the community as a purely domestic enforcement problem. By prioritizing administrative compliance over the human rights of refugees, the state may be missing an opportunity to lead on a regional humanitarian issue, instead opting for a strategy that risks exacerbating the suffering of those who have already lost everything.