PARTICIPANTSʼ AND OBSERVERSʼ PAPERS
AN INTRODUCTION TO TREATMENT AND REHABILITATION FORILLICIT DRUG USE OFFENDERS IN MALAYSIAN PRISONS
Suhaizak Ab. Wahab＊

I. INTRODUCTION
Illicit drug use in Malaysia has been known as one of the most serious problems that exists. The problem
has caused adverse effects on families, public safety and the economy of the country. (Mahmood Nazar, 2005),
and also contributed to the incremental degradation of health statistics. The health risk of illicit drug use
offenders is quite different from other addiction because it physiologically changes the body and brain evenafter the individual has stopped taking drugs. Illicit drug use also has a big potential to twist behaviour tocriminal behaviour because of drug misuse. Their are huge consequences to the health risk of individuals anddevastating impact on physical and mental health as well as psychosocial well-being and criminal behaviour.
(Norliza, 2014).
In Malaysia, the laws that govern the drug issues are many, namely the Dangerous Drug Acts 1952,
Dangerous Drug Act (Forfeitures of Property) 1988, Dangerous Drug Act (Special Preventive Measures)
1985, Drug Dependants (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Acts 1983, Act 234 Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, Act
283 Drug Dependants (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act 1985, Act 638 National Anti-Drugs Agency Act
2004 (AADK, 2018). These laws and regulations provide complete information on drugs starting from thedefinition of drugs, their illicit use, enforcement and punishment and last but not least the right to be treated
and rehabilitated. As far as the differences of legal system were concerned, Malaysia has banned illicit use of
all types and categories of drugs or substances including the use of Kratom leaves.
The illicit use of drugs is often referred to as drug or substance abuse in Malaysia, especially by scholars.
In Malaysia the terms refer to the use of drugs against the benefit of medication and by the person who not
authorized by the law. As far as illicit drug use offenders in Malaysian Prisons were concerned, most of theoffenders in Malaysian Prisons consumed (but not limited to) opiates (heroine, fit, pokteh) the drugs that are
famous and frequently used, as well as stimulants (methamphetamine, ecstasy, ice, syabu, yaba) followed byless than a third of the respondents other drugs such as marijuana, depressants and kratom as well
(Norbayusri Burhanuddin, Nordin Muhammad, 2015).
Except for Kratom that falls under the Poison Acts 1951, those were among the drugs that fall under thedefinition of dangerous drugs in the First Schedule of Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 in Malaysia. According tosections 6, 14 and 15 of the Dangerous Drugs Acts 1951, it is expressly mentioned that any act of possessing,consuming and administering dangerous drugs within the definition in the first schedule of the act areconsidered as guilty under the Acts and liable for the specified period of imprisonment and specified amountof fine. Thus, the illicit drug user is considered an offender at the first place and later on will be treated as apatient as per decision by the judges/magistrates during the trial by referring to the severity of the case.
However, this scenario will not be applicable for those who were surrendered or volunteered themselves tobe treated in the registered rehabilitation centre as in accordance with Section 8 Drugs Dependants(Treatment and Rehabilitation) Acts 1983.
The function of Malaysian Prisons is to help rehabilitate the prisoners, as well as to control and isolatethem from jeopardizing the public in general (Nicholls T.L., 2005). Since offenders are in involuntary legal
custody by order (not by will), the prisons authorities have no abilities to chose their ʻcustomersʼ to put themin treatment. Therefore, Malaysian Prisons have to treat all kinds of offenders with different types of drug

Prison Department of Malaysia. This individual paper is for the JICA course 2018. The use and publication other than for thispurpose is prohibited without the express consent of the authority of the Prison Department of Malaysia.
＊

40170TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTSʼ AND OBSERVERSʼ PAPERS

issues with their own ways. Therefore, they must live according to the rules and regulations laid out for themincluding the method of treatment; thus their movements were limited (Jabatan Penjara Malaysia, 2010). Withso many illicit drug use offenders coming in, it has created challenging factors to treat and rehabilitate themso as to follow the principle that every single case of an illicit drug use offender is unique.
Needless to say, ever since the British introduced incarceration (later adapted as the correctional system)in Malaysia, they never cease the effort to treat and rehabilitate drug abusers. This is to align with the visionof the Prison Department of Malaysia to be pioneers in corrective services and the mission, to produce
productive citizens through effective rehabilitation, conducive environment and strategic integration. The
objective of its existence is to ensure all inmates undergo safe custody until the date of discharge, to ensure
all inmates are treated according to rules and regulations, to ensure all categories of inmates are rehabilitatedthrough effective rehabilitation programmes and to prepare inmates for effective reintegration into society(Zulkifli &. N., 2017).
Effectiveness of the rehabilitation process applied to the inmates is always a current topic of society andlocal authorities. Thus, they have high expectations for these offenders to be rehabilitated during theirsentence in prison, especially those illicit drug users. Research over the last two decades has consistently
reported the beneficial effects of treatment for the drug abuser in the criminal justice system. Treating druginvolved offenders provides a unique opportunity to decrease substance abuse and reduce associated criminal
behaviour. (Redonna, 2010).

II. ISSUES, CHALLENGES AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS IN TREATMENT AND
REHABILITATION PROGRAMMES IN MALAYSIAN PRISONS
A. Maintaining the Recidivism Rate
Malaysian Prisons have regulated standard benchmarking of rehabilitation success in prison based on therecidivism rate. Currently the prison department has determined to adhere their rate of recidivism notexceeding 10% in order to indicate that rehabilitation programmes including for those offenders involved inillicit drug use. In Malaysia the recidivism rate refers to ex-convicted who reoffend and returned back toprison within 3 years after being released (Zulkifli &. N., 2017). The chart below shows the recidivism
achievement up to year 2017.

(Source: Prison Department of Malaysia)
The results showed the rehabilitation programme managed to effectively control the rate of recidivism(inmates relapsing into criminal behaviour), with 8.7% recorded in 2015, below the 9% level set by the Home
Ministry (Zulkifli, 2016).
Currently, the recidivism rate in Malaysia is the lowest in Asia. But the problem that needs to be
41

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 107

pondered is whether the trend is increasing or decreasing. This is among the problems faced by Malaysia.
In prison, the majority of prisoners are illicit drug use offenders and drug-related criminals. As far as thedrug-related crime is concerned, most of the recidivism rate is contributed by them. According to theresearch, the trend of illicit drug use offenders is likely to increase in Malaysian Prisons. This indirectlyreflected the increment of government administration cost (Jamal Ali, Sallahuddin Hassan, Noor Al-Huda
Abdul Karim, 2014). It is something that Malaysian Prisons need to be aware of as it will be exceeding thecurrent benchmarking.
As a possible solution prison authorities were of the opinion to separate normal non-drug-related crimeand drug-related crime, which mostly consists of illicit drug use offenders. They would be identified as
relapse offenders rather than recidivists. This would maintain the current rate of recidivism. So far Malaysian
Prisons were not going to benchmark the rate of relapse offenders among the illicit drug use offenders.
Therefore, they would be attended accordingly in terms of treatment and rehabilitation in order to avoid
relapse.
B. Mental Health, Depression and Offendersʼ Readiness to Change
Mental health and depression were interrelated when mental state of illicit drug use offenders isconcerned. Depression is classified under mood disorders as the mood in a major depressive episode is often
described by the person as depressed, sad, hopeless, discouraged, or ʻdown in the dumpsʼ (DSM-IV, 1994). A
mental disorder and depression are common among Malaysian offenders, and there is a growing population ofmental health problems where prisoners may be undetected and treated with this issue (Brugha, 2005).
Offenders exhibit higher levels of anxiety and depression than the general population, along with lower levelsof self-esteem, specifically among certain groups of offenders with substance abuse problems (Picken, 2012).
The depression among adults showed biased recall towards negative information relative to non-depression
adults (Saralah, 2016).
There are several cases in Malaysian Prisons showing that offenders have such symptoms. This was thechallenge that needed to be faced by the prison authority since this kind of offendersʼ condition would affectthe effectiveness of treatment and the rehabilitation process. Furthermore, readiness to change among themcannot be captured accurately when these issues are not resolved. Among others, the prison authority does
not yet initiate any treatment and rehabilitation module for the offenders who are in the state of mental
incapability and depression, and rather refers them to the hospital that is beyond the prison authorityʼsjurisdiction. As a solution, the prison authority has requested several psychiatrists from the Ministry of
Health to attend to them, and to construct such modules. Recently, the health minister has agreed to place
several psychiatrists within the prison walls to cater to such issues, which form a good kick-start. It is hopedthat treatment and rehabilitation of illicit drug use offenders is done holistically throughout the country.
Research shows that the majority of prisoners use drugs prior to custody (Boys, 2002). Therefore, thereadiness to change is important and needs to be enhanced among prisoners before they are released fromprison. Readiness to change is a crucial element influencing illicit drug use offenders to seek out, follow andcomplete treatment. In order to change their behaviour of drug abuse, prisoners should reach a state ofreadiness and willingness to change.
Stages of Change are conceptually defined as a sequence of transitions through which people progress as
they initiate and maintain behaviour change (Miller, 1996). Stages of Change are central concepts in the transtheoretical model (Prochaska, 1986). However, motivation to change problem behaviours is not equal withmotivation for participating in treatment. Many prisoners go through the treatment under pressure from theenvironment of the prison because the treatment programme in prison is compulsory. Although prisoners
enter the treatment programme every day, they still may not be ready to change and a relapse may occur.
Therefore as a solution, if a prisoner presents motivation, a quick assessment of the Stages of Change
Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES) had been introduced and applied in Malaysian
Prisons to cater to the issues together with the established instrument BDI (Beck Depression Inventories),
AQ (Aggressive Questionaires) and some others. (Mohd Fadzil, Wan Marzuki, 2012)42

170TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTSʼ AND OBSERVERSʼ PAPERS

III. ILLICIT DRUG USE OFFENDER REHABILITION AND TREATMENTPROGRAMME
A. Structured Programme: Integrated Human Development Programme
The programme was started in year 2003 and has been enhanced ever since. This is the structured
programme that was intended for all offenders in Malaysian Prisons but separated by specific modules
according to offendersʼ categories including illicit drug use offenders. The objectives of the programme were
to develop Attitudes, Skill and Knowledge of the offenders during their incarceration. The programme
consisted of 4 phases which have been simplified as follows:
PHASE

CONTENTDURATION

PHASE 1(Disciplined Emphasis Phase)

Psycho Education

2 Months

PHASE 2(Character Building Phase)

Therapeutic Community and Halaqah(Islamic-oriented Programme)
Academic

6 Months

PHASE 3
(Skill Enhancement Phase)

Nurturing Skills (Vocational & Industrial
Training)

Until qualified for
4th Phase

PHASE 4
(Reintegration Phase)

Community Programme - (Parole, Community
Rehabilitation Centre, Vocational ProgrammeOutside Prison Walls)

Until released

Malaysian Prisons depend on this programme in order to achieve the intended output of rehabilitation.
Therefore, this programme reflects on how Malaysian Prisons will achieve their recidivism rate (Zulkifli O.,
2014).
B. HUNT Modules
As a leading rehabilitation institution in this country, the Prison Department of Malaysia is responsible for
implementing drug treatment for the drug offenders where they undergo their sentences through the Human
Development Program applying a psycho-education module called HUNT. The module was introduced to the
Prison Department in year 2017. The module was constructed by the prison officers with qualified Substance
Abuse Psychology Counseling Masters Degrees. Modules consist of 17 chapters focusing on the earlyrecovery rehabilitation for illicit drug use offenders. The domains focused on are as follows: This module,
among others, evaluates the readiness to change and severity of addiction among the offenders using theprescribed instrument namely DAST-20 and URICA (Jabatan Penjara, 2017). This module was Integrated in
Human Development Program Phase 1, as mentioned earlier. The modules touched on the following items:
Stages of
Change (SOC)

The most relevantchanging process

Precontemplation toContemplation

Contemplation - Preparation

Awaness enhancement

Self-efficacy evaluation

Dramatic relief

Environmental evaluation

Self-efficacy evaluation

Balancing decision

Environmental evaluation

Self-Efficacy capability

Balancing decision

Social Liberation

The rehabilitation process then was followed by another phase of the programme that is psychosocialbased (Therapeutic Community–Phase 2), psycho-spiritual (Halaqah module‒Phase 2) and Methadone
Maintenance Therapy (MMT) for opiate medication.
43

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 107

C. Therapeutic Community Programmes
Therapeutic community programmes are one of most successful programmes as far as illicit drug use
offenders are concerned. In Malaysian Prisons, it has been started since 1992 using U.S.A. frameworks by theofficers who received that particular training. This programme was based on the help of peer groups,
residential family oriented, where offenders are put together in their family (other offenders who having thesame interest) to undergo the drug rehabilitation process (Penjara, 2014). Among the modality objectives, theframework is as follows:
1. Developing offenderʼs autonomous decision making
2. Developing the offenderʼs life objectives
3. Enhancing sensitivity towards himself and others
4. Developing self-efficacy and reducing self-defeating outlook
5. Developing communication and confrontation skills
The decision to implement TC is on the ground that based on the result showed by the research that reincarceration rates were lower among those who received TC treatment compared without TC treatment(Prendergast, 2004).
D. Methadone Maintenance Therapy
This is the one and only pharmacological treatment that has been implemented for illicit drug use
offenders in Malaysian Prisons. This programme started in 2009 where synthetic drugs called methadone
were used to replace opioids to reduce dependency. This programme is purposely focused on the reduction ofharm caused by the offender who has stopped using drugs but is physically and psychologically dependent on
the substance, especially opioids. Since the programme was monitored by the Ministry of Health, the rate ofeffectiveness of the programme throughout Malaysia rest with them. However, the therapy was very
effective for the offenders in Malaysian Prisons (Penjara, 2014).
E. Rehabilitation Outside Prison Walls
Besides the programme implemented inside the prison perimeter, there are several methods used by
Malaysian Prisons to exhilarate the rehabilitation process of the offender that is outside the prison walls,
called the reintegration process. This process is the next stage of the rehabilitation process that has been
mentioned earlier. It shows that the rate of recidivism among the illicit drug use offenders who haveundergone this process was below 1%. The rehabilitation programmes were:
1. Parole System
Unlike some countries that use court-ordered parole, this system was issued by Malaysian Prisons withclose supervision by Parole Board Authorities. It was established in 2008 where offenders were put ouside
the prison walls to have a normal functioning life with their families, but under prison authority supervision.
Their parole date lapsed once their imprisonment period is over and they were released. In Malaysia, unlike
other countries, the parole order was granted with the suggestion of the Malaysian Prisons, not direct
issuance of the judiciary. Therefore prisoners must undergo the imprisonment process before the parole
order was granted, subject to their good behaviour and compliance with other compulsory conditions.
Therefore, parole duration in Malaysia is determined on the remaining days left to the release date. Once theimprisonment period ends, the parole duration is over. Their parole period is part of the imprisonment period.
This method of rehabilitation was the best practiced pre-aftercare programme provided by Malaysian
Prisons since by-laws have no authority whatsoever to regulate the life of offenders once they are released;
therefore it is hard to implement real-time aftercare services.
2. Community Rehabilitation Program (CRP)
A centre has been established outside the prison perimeters to gather offenders and undergo skills andvocational training together with the society. Here, their skills (including farming, manufacturing andagriculture) were either nurtured or enhanced to enable to offenders to sustain themselves after release fromprison. Unlike the Parole System that requires offenders to sustain their own lives during the programme,
44170TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTSʼ AND OBSERVERSʼ PAPERS

offenders at this centre would be closely monitored by prison officers within required proximity. Although
the severity of the crime and the period of imprisonment are the factors that separated offenders in theparole system and CRP, nevertheless the objectives were the same: to promote strong self-efficacy of theoffenders to face the community in order to avoid relapse and reoffending.

IV. CONCLUSION
The main objective of drug treatment of the Prison Department is to rehabilitate and to treat as well as toprevent relapse among drug offenders. Prisoners are the products of the prison and the nation who arewilling to change their negative behaviour towards becoming an excellent individual. Prison authorities haveplayed their part well in overcoming such issues and will keep going until it keeps the Malaysian nation ingood condition. In doing so, countless efforts have been done, numbers of suggessions have been taken into
account, and several research projects have been set up. Currently Malaysian Prisons authority hassuggested alternative punishment for illicit drug use offenders namely Day Parole, Home Detention,suspended sentence and compulsory attendance order as alternative rehabilitation. The researcher believes
this is a way to decrease the chances of re-arrests, reducing the costs associated with incarceration, providingthem with the choice of changing substance abusing behaviour, to overcome overcrowding and to strengthen
drug treatment among drug offenders. However further studies have to be done and serious discussions
among agencies in the criminal justice system have to be made before it can be implemented.

WORKS CITED
AADK. (2018, JULY 30th). Acts on Drugs. Retrieved July 30th, 2018, from National Anti-Drugs Agency: https://www.adk.gov.my/akta-pekeliling/akta-dadah/
Blume, A. W. (2001). Motivating drinking behavior change depressive symptoms may not be noxious.
Addictive Behaviors Journal.
Boys, A. F. (2002). Drug Use and Initation in Prison : Results from a National Prison Survey in England andWales. Addiction Journal.
Brugha, T. S. (2005). Psychosis in the community and in prisons : A Report from the British National Survey of
Psychiatric Morbidity. American Journal of Psychiatric.
Cassandra Perryman, G. D. (2016). “Changes in posttraumatic stress disorders symptoms during and after
therapeutic community drug and alcohol treatment”, Therapeutic Communities. The International
Journal of Therapeutic Communities, Vol. 37 Issue: 4.
Chan, T. &. (2017, 3 23). NCBI US National Library of Medicine National Institute of Health. Retrieved 11 11,
2017, from Life satisfaction and perceived stress among young offenders in a residential therapeuticcommunity: Latent change score analysis.: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?linkname=pubmed_
pubmed&from_uid=28343083
David Wright, &. W. (2000). Treating Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder In A Therapeutic Community: The
Experience Of A Canadian Psychiatric Hospital. Therapeutic Communities: The International Journal for
Therapeutic and Supportive Organizations.
De Leon, W. H. (2009). The therapeutic community for addictions: an evolving knowledge base. Journal of
Drug Issues.
DSM-IV. (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Washington, DC: American
Psychiatric Association.
Fauziah. (2011). Gender differences among drug Abusers in the process of Readiness to Changes. World
Applied Sciences Journal 12. Special issue of social and Psychological sciences for human development.
Fielding, T. G. (2002). Los Angeles County drug court programs: initial results. Journal of Substance Abuse
45

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 107

Treatment.
Heffner, C. L. (2015). Erikson’s Stages of Psychosocial Development. Retrieved June 2, 2015, from All Psych
Virtual Psycholoy Classroom: http://allpsych.com/psychology101/social_development/
Jabatan Penjara Malaysia. (2010). Sinar Keinsafan / Ray of Repentance. Kuala Lumpur: Percetakan Nasional
Malaysia Berhad.
Jabatan Penjara, M. (2017). Modul Pemulihan Dadah (Drug rehabilitation Modul) HUNT. Selangor: Jabatan
Penjara Malaysia.
Jamal Ali, Sallahuddin Hassan, Noor Al-Huda Abdul Karim. (2014). Kos Ekonomi Penyalahgunaan Dadah(Economical Costing on Illicit Drug Use). Selangor: National AntiDrug Agency.
Mahmood Nazar, M. H. (2005). Estimation of drug users and injecting drug users in Malaysia. Department of
Publication and Media Technology Universiti Utara Malaysia.
Miller, W. R. (1996). Assessing drinkersʼ motivation for change: The Stages of Change Readiness andTreatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors.
Mohd Fadzil, Wan Marzuki. (2012). Modul Pelaksanaan Alat Ukur Psikologi Jabatan Penjara Malaysia(Implimentation of Psychological Tools in Prison Department of Malaysia). Kajang: Prison Department of
Malaysia.
Nicholls T.L. (2005). Jail Screenin Assessment Tool (JSAT) : Guidelines for Mental Health Screening in Jails.
Mental Health, Law and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University Journal.
Norbayusri Burhanuddin, Nordin Muhammad. (2015). ADULTHOOD DIFFERENCES AMONG DRUG
OFFENDERS IN THE LEVEL OF DEPRESSION AND READINESS TO CHANGE. PREVENT 2015.
Norhayati. (1995). Penagihan Semula Dadah : Hubungan Antara Individu Dalam Keadaan Berisiko Tinggi
dengan Personaliti dan Kepuasan Hidup. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Norliza, N. A. (2014). A Review of Substance Abuse Research in Malaysia. Med J Journal Vol 14.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: NY: McGraw-Hill.
Penjara, J. (2014, July 14). Portal Rasmi Jabatan Penjara Malaysia. Retrieved Mei 1, 2018, from TerapeuticCommunity in Prison: http://www.prison.gov.my/images/carta/bahagian.htm
Picken, J. (2012). The Coping Strategies, Adjustment, and well being of male inmates in the prison
environment. Internet Journal of Criminology.
Prendergast, H. W. (2004). Amity Prisonbased therapeutic community: 5-year outcomes. Prison Journal.
Prochaska, J. O. (1986). Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more integrative model of change. Psychotherapy:
Theory, Research, and Practice.
Redonna, K. B. (2010). Treating Drug Abuse and Addiction in the Criminal Justice System: Improving Public
Health and Safet. US National Library of Medicine.
Saralah, D. (2016). Comparison of Depression between Remanded and Sentenced Inmates. Journal ofAdvanced Research in Social and Behavioural Sciences.
UK Prison & Probation. (2016). The Guardian. Retrieved from Keep under-25s out of adult prisons: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/26/keep-young-offenders-out-of-adult-prisons-mps-urge

46

170TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTSʼ AND OBSERVERSʼ PAPERS

UK Prison Reform Trust. (2013). Prison Reform Trust Submission Transforming Management of Young
Adults in Custody.
Wan Shahrazad. (2011). Psychopatological profile and readiness to changes among drug addicts in Malaysia.
World Applied Sciences Journal.
Wexler, W. R. (1986). The Stayʼn Out therapeutic community: prison treatment for substance abusers. Journal
Psychoactive Drugs.
Yahya, &. M. (2002). Penagihan Dadah & Perlakuan Jenayah: Pengaruh Faktor Psikososial dan Institusi.
Jurnal psikologi Malaysia.
Zulkifli. (2016). The Sun Daily. Kuala Lumpur: The Sun Daily.
Zulkifli, &. N. (2017). The Relationship Between Leadership, Locus of Control and Self-Efficacy in Complying
with Standing Orders within the Prisons Department of Malaysia. Malaysia Correctional Journal, 3.
Zulkifli, O. (2014). Integrated Human Development Program. Kajang: Malaysia Prison Department.

47