SUBMISSION
SUBMISSION
CENTRE FOR RESEARCH
IN LAW AND DEVELOPMENT IN ASIA
2026
Abstract
This paper examines the adequacy of Malaysia's legal framework in protecting consumers engaged in e-commerce within the context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Using a doctrinal legal research methodology supplemented by comparative analysis of selected aspects of Australian consumer protection law, the study evaluates Malaysia's principal legal framework governing e-commerce and examines emerging challenges arising from platform-based business models, artificial intelligence, data protection, cybersecurity, and cross-border digital transactions.
The findings identify important legal gaps in Malaysia's existing framework, particularly regarding digital consumer rights, platform accountability, seller verification, consumer redress mechanisms, and the regulation of emerging digital technologies. Accordingly, the study proposes targeted legislative reforms, supported by consumer legal education, AI-powered legal assistance, and strategic collaboration to strengthen the practical implementation of consumer protection laws. Collectively, these recommendations aim to enhance consumer confidence, improve regulatory effectiveness, and strengthen Malaysia's digital consumer protection framework.
Keywords: Consumer Protection, E-Commerce, Malaysia, Consumer Rights, Platform Liability, Digital Transactions, Data Privacy, Cyber Security, Fourth Industrial Revolution, Australian Consumer Law.
Lim Zhen Ping
Abstract
This paper examines the rise in medical negligence claims in Malaysia and argues that this trend reflects underlying structural gaps within the medico-legal framework. Adopting a doctrinal legal research methodology complemented by analytical and comparative approaches, the study analyses legislation, judicial decisions, government reports, and relevant academic literature to assess the adequacy of Malaysia's existing medico-legal framework. It examines the interaction between common law principles, statutory provisions, and regulatory oversight. It further evaluates the impacts of evolving legal standards, judicial developments, institutional challenges in healthcare delivery, and increasing patient awareness.
The findings indicate that although the existing framework provides flexibility through common law, it is characterised by inconsistency, fragmented accountability, regulatory limitations, and inadequate patient-centred mechanisms. In particular, the regulatory scope of the Medical Act 1971 does not adequately address modern medico-legal challenges, resulting in a disconnect between professional regulation and civil liability.
The paper concludes that targeted reforms, including clearer standards of care, improved reporting mechanisms, enhanced regulatory oversight, and the institutionalisation of alternative dispute resolution, are necessary to Malaysia's medico-legal framework while balancing patient protection with the practical realities of medical practice.
Keywords: Malaysia, Medical Negligence, Medico-legal Framework, Standard of Care, Medical Act 1971, Law Reform.
​
Keshviena A/P Ramachandarn, Bethan Tsai Ong, Ebony Chin Li Jean, Vaishnavi A/P Sanase, Agnes Pek and Wan Marcella Faizi Binti Azarol Faizi
Abstract
This article explores persistent educational inequality in primary education in rural areas of Malaysia and evaluates whether legal reform is necessary to achieve equal access to quality education. Although Malaysia recognises education as a fundamental right through constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks, and international human rights commitments, significant gaps remain between rural and urban schools. Through legal analysis, academic research, and insights gathered from non-governmental organisations and educators, the study identifies four main factors contributing to educational inequality: the digital divide, socioeconomic class, educational malpractice, and inadequate infrastructure. The findings show that existing government initiatives and policies, although beneficial, are often limited by inconsistent implementation and lack of accountability, leaving rural students at a continued disadvantage that affects long-term outcomes. This article argues for stronger legal safeguards, concludes that educational equity requires substantive reforms to protect the rights of rural students and ensure they receive such education on equal footing with their urban counterparts.
Keywords: Constitutional law, Rural education in Malaysia, Education inequality, Human Rights, Reform​
Deborah Ong Jie En, Low Pey Leigh and Ismail Rajwan Nashid
Abstract
Peaceful assembly has long functioned as one of the most visible forms of collective political expression, particularly in moments of immediacy and public contestation. This article examines the constitutional protection of peaceful assembly in Malaysia, focusing on the tension between Article 10(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution and the procedural controls imposed under the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 (‘PAA 2012’). It argues that while regulation may be necessary to preserve public order and security, such requirements become difficult to justify when they operate as indirect barriers to the exercise of the right. Using a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology, this article examines Malaysian constitutional provisions, statutory requirements under the PAA 2012, and relevant case law alongside selected common law jurisdictions, namely Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, and the Maldives. It situates Malaysia’s framework within broader common law approaches, highlighting the distinction between facilitative regulation and control-oriented restriction. It traces the inconsistent interpretation of Article 10(2)(b), from Nik Nazmi to Yuneswaran and Maria Chin, before considering the Federal Court’s decision in Amir Hariri. Its significance extends beyond the invalidation of section 9(5), inviting reconsideration of the PAA 2012 and its restrictive procedural features. The article finds that the PAA 2012 risks transforming peaceful assembly from a constitutional right into a procedurally conditional privilege.
Keywords: Malaysia, Freedom of Assembly, Peaceful Assembly Act, Fundamental Liberties, Proportionality, Judicial Interpretation.
Ahmed Saif Fadhil
Abstract
This article critically evaluates the compatibility of drone warfare with the principle of distinction under international humanitarian law (IHL), focusing on the structural implications of technologically mediated targeting practices. While unmanned aerial operations are often justified on the basis of enhanced precision and reduced operational risk, their increasing reliance on data-driven processes raises fundamental concerns regarding the reliability of target identification and the protection of civilian populations.
The analysis examines how core IHL principles—distinction, proportionality, and precautions in attack—operate within the context of remote warfare. It highlights a shift from direct human assessment to intelligence-based and behavioral forms of targeting, in which individuals are identified through patterns of activity rather than verified status. This transformation introduces a probabilistic logic into targeting decisions, heightening the likelihood of misclassification and expanding the scope of potential error.
Particular attention is given to the cumulative effects of repeated drone strikes and their interaction with complex operational environments, especially in urban settings, where proportionality assessments are complicated and precautionary measures are constrained. The article also explores how limited transparency and distributed decision-making structures obscure accountability.
It is argued that these challenges are structural in nature, requiring a reassessment of how IHL principles operate within increasingly automated warfare.
Keywords: Drone Warfare; International Humanitarian Law; Principle of Distinction; Civilian Protection; Targeted Killing; Autonomous Weapons Systems.
Lim Eu Xuan
Abstract
This paper examines the emergence of “laws without closure” in Malaysia, referring to reform legislation that continues to attract sustained criticism and calls for amendment even after enactment. Through an analysis of recent Bills, particularly the Government Procurement Bill and the Online Safety Bill, the paper demonstrates how shortcomings in drafting, consultation and parliamentary deliberation may contribute to legislation that remains contested and may hinder the attainment of certainty, finality and public confidence ordinarily expected of legal reform. While legal indeterminacy is an inevitable feature of law-making, these reform Bills illustrate how shortcomings in legislative design may pose challenges to the rule of law, particularly the principles of legality and legal certainty.
Keywords: Legislative Design, Rule of Law, Legality, Legal Certainty, Legislative Drafting, Public Consultation; Parliamentary Deliberation, Malaysia