Malaysia’s double role in the global e-waste trade

MALAYSIA is not merely a victim of the global electronic waste crisis; it is also a participant — both legally and illegally — in a complex transboundary trade governed by the Basel Convention.

As a signatory to the convention, Malaysia allows the importation of e-waste under strict conditions. Hazardous waste shipments must be declared by the exporting country and approved by the receiving nation through a Prior Informed Consent (PIC) process. In principle, imports are permitted provided they are properly declared, accurately classified and processed at licensed facilities.

Approvals, however, often rely heavily on documentation submitted by exporters. Blanket clearances may be granted based on notifications rather than detailed physical inspections, leaving authorities dependent on the accuracy and honesty of declarations made at the port of origin. Problems typically surface only when containers are physically opened and inspected.

In reality, sources say, the situation is far more complicated.

Illegal e-waste rarely arrives labelled as “hazardous waste.” Instead, shipments are commonly declared under vague categories such as “used electrical equipment,” “metal scrap” or “second-hand goods,” only to later be identified as hazardous material. Some consignments exploit Approved Permits (APs), shell companies with short lifespans or technical thresholds that allow components to slip in just below hazardous classifications. In other cases, documentation does not match the cargo, or containers are diverted after clearing initial checks.

“When a container arrives, someone receives it. Its origin is known. It is placed in a designated lot at the port. If goods were later removed, there should be documentation.

“Who authorised the release? Were they waiting for the right moment to move the goods out? Surely there must be records,” said one source familiar with port operations.

The entry chain typically begins at major ports such as Port Klang, Penang Port and Kuantan. Containers pass through port authorities and Customs, where declarations are reviewed. Customs’ role centres largely on documentation checks rather than physical inspection of every container.

The scale of operations illustrates the challenge. Port Klang Authority alone handles more than 40,000 containers daily. In 2025, Port Klang recorded 15.14 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units), ranking it among the world’s busiest container ports. With limited scanning equipment and manpower, comprehensive inspection of every shipment is virtually impossible. Detection therefore depends heavily on risk profiling and selective inspections.

Between 2021 and 2025, authorities intercepted 701 containers suspected of carrying illegal e-waste. While significant, these seizures represent only a small fraction of overall container traffic.

Sources said illegal operators exploit this reality. Some containers are stored for extended periods before removal. Others are partially extracted before enforcement raids occur. The smuggling chain may involve multiple actors — shipping firms, forwarding agents, logistics handlers, local landowners and factory operators. Although this does not automatically indicate organised crime, the coordination required suggests structured networks rather than isolated offenders.

On paper, Malaysia’s regulatory framework is stringent. Illegal importation, storage or disposal of e-waste falls under the Environmental Quality Act 1974, the Environmental Quality (Scheduled Wastes) Regulations 2005 and the Customs Act 1967. Penalties include fines of up to RM500,000, imprisonment of up to five years and seizure of equipment. Malaysia is also bound by the Basel Convention’s requirements on transboundary hazardous waste movements.

Yet enforcement involves multiple agencies with overlapping mandates. The Environment Department (DOE) regulates hazardous waste. The Royal Malaysian Customs Department oversees import documentation. Port authorities manage logistics operations. The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigates graft.

“In theory, the inter-agency structure exists. In practice, coordination gaps allow Malaysia to remain a vulnerable node in the global e-waste trade. We are caught between legitimate recycling ambitions and illicit profit-driven networks,” the source said.

Corruption remains a structural vulnerability. Despite internal audits, personnel rotations and investigations, the high profitability of illegal e-waste creates strong incentives for bribery.

While Malaysia has successfully repatriated illegal shipments to countries including the US, the UK, Japan and China, the process — detection, technical verification, diplomatic notification and return at the exporter’s expense — can take months or even years.

The source also said once shipments leave Malaysian waters, monitoring their final disposal becomes more difficult, raising questions about end-to-end accountability.

Following recent raids at Port Klang, the Special Task Force on the Direction of Enforcement Management of Plastic Waste and E-Waste Imports announced a ban on e-waste imports, reclassifying them under the Absolute Prohibition category in the Customs (Prohibition of Imports) Order 2023.

Previously, e-waste had been listed under the “Conditional Prohibition Except in the Manner Provided” category in the Third Schedule, Part 1, of the same order. Under that classification, the director-general of the DOE retained discretionary powers to grant exemptions for certain imports, subject to conditions.

Environmental experts said the shift to absolute prohibition signals a tightening of policy. However, the deeper challenge lies not in the absence of laws, but in closing documentation loopholes, strengthening inter-agency coordination and addressing integrity gaps across the enforcement chain.

Ultimately, smuggling persists not only because of limitations in scanning technology, but because the probability of detection remains lower than the profitability of the trade.