The United Kingdom’s rollout of a national digital identity system for immigration and employment checks offers an intriguing model for Malaysia, a country grappling with long-standing problems of undocumented immigration, abuse of migrant labour, and corruption within its immigration enforcement agencies.
While the UK’s digital identity
scheme is designed to streamline legal access to work and services, Malaysia
could potentially adapt such a system not only to manage its foreign worker
population more effectively, but also to combat corruption and strengthen
national security.
However, its success would hinge
on how well the system is designed, governed, and implemented especially given
the systemic challenges faced by Malaysia’s immigration enforcement apparatus.
One of the most pressing issues
in Malaysia’s immigration system is the problem of "counter setting"a
term that refers to illegal or under-the-table arrangements between corrupt
immigration officers and agents, where undocumented migrants are registered (or
re-registered) for a fee, without following official procedures.
These schemes often involve
forged documents, tampered biometric data, or fake work permits and passes,
leading to a shadow population of migrants whose records are either falsified
or untraceable.
This has not only contributed to
a loss of government revenue but also compromised the integrity of the
immigration database, undermining efforts to monitor the true scale of foreign
labour presence in the country.
A digital identity system, if
designed with built-in safeguards, could be a powerful tool to disrupt these
corrupt practices. By centralizing and automating identity verification through
biometrics (such as fingerprints or facial recognition), it would reduce
opportunities for manual intervention by immigration officers thereby cutting
down on discretionary power, which is often the root of corruption.
For instance, the current
reliance on physical documents and manual approvals creates multiple
"touchpoints" where bribes can be solicited. In contrast, digital
systems that authenticate directly against a secure, centralized database offer
fewer opportunities for tampering or unauthorized access.
However, merely digitizing
identity is not a magic bullet. A digital system is only as honest as the
people who run it. If immigration officers or system administrators are not
held accountable, or if audit logs can be deleted or altered without detection,
then corruption will simply evolve to exploit digital loopholes.
This is why any digital ID
initiative in Malaysia must be implemented alongside strong oversight
mechanisms such as real-time audit trails, independent monitoring bodies, and
whistleblower protection. Moreover, integration with other systems such as
health, education, police, and employment would ensure that inconsistencies in
data (for example, a worker registered with multiple employers) can be flagged
and investigated quickly.
Another significant advantage of
a well-governed digital ID system is its potential to provide Malaysia with
accurate, real-time data on both documented and undocumented immigrants. At
present, estimates of undocumented foreign workers in Malaysia vary widely from
1.2 million to over 3 million due to inconsistent registration exercises,
overlapping databases, and weak enforcement.
This data vacuum poses a serious
national security concern. Undocumented migrants may be vulnerable to
exploitation, involved in illicit activities, or become vectors for
cross-border threats such as human trafficking, drug smuggling, or even
terrorism. Without reliable data, it is difficult for the government to develop
targeted policies, respond to emergencies (such as pandemics or disasters), or
ensure adequate service delivery.
A digital ID scheme, if extended
to include even those currently undocumented through a safe and temporary
registration process, could close this information gap. By capturing
biometrics, nationality, employment status, and address, the government would have
a much clearer picture of the migrant landscape.
This would enable better
forecasting for labour needs, improve urban planning, and strengthen border
management. More importantly, once there is visibility, the government can
segment the undocumented population those eligible for regularization, those
awaiting repatriation, and those under investigation for criminal activity. It
would also allow for data sharing between enforcement and intelligence
agencies, reducing duplication and inefficiency.
However, success would depend on
trust and incentive structures. Many undocumented migrants are fearful of
engaging with official systems due to past experiences of detention,
deportation, or abuse. If a digital ID scheme is perceived purely as an enforcement
tool, uptake will be low.
Instead, the government must pair
it with a transparent amnesty or regularization program, clearly communicating
that registration does not lead to immediate deportation, but rather access to
legal status or services. Employers too must be brought into the fold through
mandatory digital ID checks, penalties for hiring undocumented workers, and
incentives for legal compliance.
Of course, digital ID
implementation comes with its own risks: chief among them being surveillance
overreach and data misuse. In the wrong hands, such systems could be weaponized
for racial profiling, political targeting, or systemic discrimination.
Therefore, robust data protection
laws, independent audits, and judicial oversight must be core pillars of the
system. Malaysia’s current Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) is insufficient
for this scale of surveillance and should be reformed to address biometric data
handling, cross-border data transfers, and data subject rights.
In conclusion, a digital identity
system modelled on the UK’s initiative has strong potential to address two of
Malaysia’s most entrenched immigration challenges: corruption in immigration
enforcement and lack of accurate data on the migrant population.
By automating identity
verification, reducing human discretion, and improving inter-agency
coordination, such a system could reduce counter setting and allow the
government to know perhaps for the first time the exact number of foreign
nationals in the country.
This knowledge is essential not
just for labour planning but for safeguarding national security. However,
implementation must be done in phases, backed by legal reform, institutional
accountability, and most critically, the trust of the migrant communities it
aims to document.
Without these, the digital ID may
simply become another layer of bureaucracy that susceptible to the same
corruption it seeks to eliminate.
02.10.2025
Kuala Lumpur.
© All rights reserved.
https://focusmalaysia.my/digital-id-to-curb-corruption-secure-borders/
Comments