Malaysia: Applications to use sex offender registry still low – Hannah Yeoh

[malaysiakini.com – 8/6/19]

Only 92 applications to check 1,497 names have been received for the sex offenders registry (e-DKK) which was launched by the Women. Family and Community Development Ministry in March.

Its deputy minister Hannah Yeoh (photo, above) said the number of applicants using the registry from April to July was still low due to the lack of awareness in society, especially nursery operators when hiring caregivers or new workers.

Read more

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

11 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

maybe we can use this to point out that it cost too much to run Megan’s website in California.

I truly don’t get this obsession with $EX. Do people who run “nurseries” (as these fruitloops call them) not care if people only got drunk, drove some neighbor’s children in a vehicle, and “accidentally” got them murdered? Or how about someone who got really angry at a neighbor’s child and smashed his/her face in with a shovel? That is not nearly as dangerous as looking at pictures!

Are those people put on their “sex offender registry”? How about people who’ve only been convicted multiple times of beating a spouse nearly to death? Stabbing someone while robbing them? Pointing a gun in someone’s face? Or perhaps they can just use the nursery to hide their meth? Doesn’t seem dangerous to me.

So what is this idiotic obsession with $EX?! Wouldn’t a person running a “nursery” want to do full background checks on any employee? Why in the world would anyone have any need for some extra Registry? I really don’t get it.

But the great thing about it all is that they can check their BS Registries and run background checks all they want and it will do nothing significantly useful. They will still have the number of problems that they would’ve had if they had done nothing. Probably more. I can’t feel sorry for them.

“not care if people only got drunk, drove some neighbor’s children in a vehicle, and “accidentally” got them murdered? Or how about someone who got really angry at a neighbor’s child and smashed his/her face in with a shovel? That is not nearly as dangerous as looking at pictures!”

I know this seems a relevant question, especially to us, but it is a losing argument and muddies the waters when attacking the registry. Just because some other circumstances may call for the same treatment, if they want to be consistent and half ass appear to be rational, does not necessarily lessen the perceived need for what is already in place. It certainly points to the irrational part, but once again just because it is irrational to apply something to one group and not the other is a losing argument.
And believe me, I am the farthest one from accepting and rationalizing any registry. I just hear this argument a lot and feel it needs to be said.

Just saw this topic pop back up in the news. The registry only applies to those convicted after 2017. And recently a person convicted in the UK who served 9 months went back to MY to get a scholarship for a doctorate.

https://www.worldofbuzz.com/wan-azizah-we-should-let-nur-fitri-pursue-his-studies-as-he-served-his-punishment/