Malaysia hosts millions of migrants: willing and coerced, with legal status and without. Despite relying on migrant workers, Malaysian policies do little to alleviate exploitation. Malaysia has signed the UN and The Association of Southeast Asian Nations anti-trafficking protocols, but has not signed the UN refugee or statelessness conventions. Why sign some international agreements related to trafficking and not others? Have these treaties helped Malaysia combat human smuggling and trafficking, and does this matter for understanding migrant welfare? The answers are found by looking at complex international pressures and domestic political calculations about the costs, benefits, and effects of each treaty.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amy Lynn Freedman (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: