PETALING JAYA: Proposals to prosecute minors in statutory rape cases have drawn strong opposition from child rights groups and legal experts, who warn such a move would contradict existing protections for children and undermine the law’s intent.
Child Rights Innovation and Betterment (CRIB) Foundation co-chairperson Srividhya Ganapathy described the suggestion as regressive and legally unsound.
“Under current law, statutory rape charges are rightly brought against the man. To extend liability to the girl fundamentally contradicts the protective purpose of the law. Criminalising children is never the solution.”
She warned that prosecuting girls under 16 would entrench victim-blaming, deter abuse reports and perpetuate harmful stereotypes such as blaming a child’s clothing or suggesting she “wanted it”.
“This is not protection, it is punishment disguised as morality.”
Srividhya stressed that statutory rape provisions exist to remove the element of consent and protect children from being treated as though they can agree to sex.
“If we start prosecuting children, we turn a protective law into a punitive one. That distorts legislative intent. Instead of safeguarding the vulnerable party, the law would be weaponised against them,” she told theSun.
She urged lawmakers to include a peer-to-peer or suka sama suka defence for consensual relationships involving minors, where the age gap is three years or less, to avoid criminalisation.
“Many young people in relationships are unaware that consensual sex with a person under 16 is a crime. The state has a duty to educate and empower children with knowledge, not punish them for its own failure to provide essential information.”
Srividhya said prosecuting both boys and girls would also contravene domestic and international child protection standards.
“It would silence survivors, discourage reporting and normalise victim-blaming – the opposite of what a child-centred justice system should do.”
She added that custodial sentences and institutionalisation would derail a child’s future.
“We urge the government to reject such proposals, amend the law to include a peer-to-peer defence, abolish child marriage by setting 18 as the minimum age and provide reproductive health education in schools. We also urge the release of transparent data on education and recidivism in custodial and welfare institutions.”
Women for Women secretary Linda Lam also rejected the idea, calling it discriminatory and inconsistent with Malaysian law and international conventions.
“Children, whether girls or boys, must never be criminalised for statutory rape. Even the word consensual should not be used as minors are legally incapable of giving consent,” she said, in response to police claims that over 90% of statutory rape cases were consensual.
Lam said focusing solely on girls reflects gender bias and risks discouraging victims from lodging reports.
“Boys and girls are equally susceptible to grooming and exploitation. Both deserve equal protection under the law. Singling out girls reinforces harmful stereotypes and shifts the blame onto them.”
Instead of criminalisation, Lam urged stronger enforcement of existing laws such as the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 to ensure perpetrators are brought to justice.
“What children need are safe spaces, counselling and sex education. Children, especially girls, are victims and should not be treated as offenders.”
She added that caregivers and educators must be trained to identify grooming behaviours early, while accessible reporting channels should be provided.
Kelantan police chief Datuk Mohd Yusoff Mamat had earlier suggested charging girls in statutory rape cases, saying it would serve as a warning to teenagers.
Law and Institutional Reform Minister Azalina Othman Said later clarified that Yusoff’s remarks were his personal opinion, affirming the government’s commitment to international norms in handling cases involving minors. Seputeh MP Teresa Kok also criticised the suggestion as lacking gender sensitivity and legal understanding.
