KUALA LUMPUR, July 25 — The proposed 2025 amendment to the Poisons Act 1952 (Act 366) expands enforcement authority to police officers of any rank and anyone appointed by the health minister.
Health Minister Dzulkefly Ahmad tabled the Poisons (Amendment) Bill 2025 for first reading in the Dewan Rakyat last Tuesday; it is expected to complete readings and pass the Lower House in the current meeting scheduled until August 28.
The Poisons amendment bill seeks to change the definition of “authorised officer” in Section 2(1)(b) of Act 366 to include “a police officer as defined under the Police Act 1967 [Act 344]”, expanding on the current definition that limits police officers defined as authorised officers to those “not below the rank of Inspector.”
The 2025 amendment bill also proposes a new Section 31A that empowers the health minister to “appoint in writing any person to be an authorised officer subject to such terms and conditions as the Minister may impose.”
The existing Section 31A is proposed under the amendment bill to be renumbered to Section 31AA. This existing provision states that “an authorised officer shall have all the powers of a police officer of whatever rank as provided for under the Criminal Procedure Code [Act 593] in relation to enforcement, inspection and investigation.”
The Poisons (Amendment) Bill 2025 seeks to widen the scope of the definition of “premises” under Section 2(1) of Act 366 that includes “any land, building or part of any building; any place whether open or enclosed; any conveyance; any installation on land, offshore installation or other installation whether on the bed of or floating on any water; and any structure whether movable or immovable.”
The existing definition of “premises” in Act 366 “includes any house, shop, store, room, cubicle, shed, conveyance, structure or any place whether open or enclosed.”
FPMPAM: Cops Lack Technical Knowledge On Poison Regulations
The Federation of Private Medical Practitioners’ Associations, Malaysia (FPMPAM) criticised the government’s proposal to include police officers of any rank as “authorised officers” under Act 366.
“This move is unjustified, excessive, and lacking in transparency,” FPMPAM president Dr Shanmuganathan TV Ganeson told CodeBlue in a statement.
“The enforcement of poison regulations involves technical knowledge, clinical context, and regulatory understanding — areas where most police officers have no training. This is not a criminal investigation issue, but a regulatory matter that should remain under the purview of the Pharmacy Enforcement Division.”
The doctors’ group asked what problem the Poisons (Amendment) Bill 2025 was trying to solve, whether there were widespread enforcement failures, and if there was data showing that current mechanisms were inadequate.
“Our concern is that this amendment may pave the way for overreach, misuse of enforcement powers, and intimidation of frontline medical professionals, especially those in small or solo practices,” said FPMPAM.
“We must also ask: Do the police even have the time or capacity to enforce poison infractions meaningfully? Experience shows that even police reports made by the Malaysian Medical Council (MMC) are often marked ‘No Further Action.’
“FPMPAM calls for this provision to be immediately reviewed, justified with evidence, or withdrawn. Enforcement should be competent, professional, and proportionate — not outsourced indiscriminately.”
Dr Shanmuganathan said FPMPAM wasn’t consulted prior to the tabling of the Poisons amendment bill. He added that FPMPAM will raise the matter with fellow medical societies, stakeholders, and lawmakers in the coming days.
There may not be enough time, though. According to the Dewan Rakyat’s Order Paper, the Poisons (Amendment) Bill 2025 is the first bill slated for second reading, which means that the bill will likely be debated this Monday, after which it may be approved by MPs on either the same or following day.
