Migrant workers and refugees in Malaysia, despite facing systemic exclusion and profound vulnerability, have forged resilient grassroots movements for dignity and survival. These self-organising efforts are born from necessity, driven by daily crises and a refusal to remain invisible. Ultimately, it reveals a powerful truth: these communities are quietly rewriting the politics of care, dignity, and labour justice through an ethic of solidarity, trust-building, and inclusive leadership.
Despite being the backbone of Malaysia’s economy and social fabric, migrant workers and refugees in Malaysia face systemic exclusion and profound vulnerability. This hidden reality drives a powerful, grassroots movement for dignity and survival. The country hosts an estimated 2.4 million documented and up to 3.5 million undocumented migrant workers, primarily from Indonesia, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar and the Philippines. According to the Department of Statistics, migrant workers comprise approximately 14.4% of the country’s total workforce of 17.34 million workers employed across key sectors, including services, construction, manufacturing, plantations, and domestic work. Most workers are employed in labour-intensive jobs, also classified as “3D” (dirty, difficult, and dangerous work), highlighting their precarious working conditions.
As of May 2025, about 200,260 refugees and asylum seekers were registered with UNHCR in Malaysia. However, as the country has not ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, refugees lack legal recognition under domestic law. Consequently, they are often treated as undocumented migrants, exposing them to risks such as detention, exploitation, and restricted access to basic rights. The right of refugees to work in Malaysia remains shrouded in mystery, as the National Security Council’s Directive 23 has yet to be made public.
This institutional neglect has prompted the rise of a quiet, resilient alternative: self-organising by migrant and refugee communities. The community groups have built grassroots networks (informal) of mutual assistance, protection, and solidarity that function as de facto unions, crisis response teams, and community care systems. These are movements born not from privilege (political opportunity) but from necessity. The organising strategies described are not always visible in formal advocacy spaces or donor frameworks. Still, they are unfolding every day in plantation fields, factories, dormitories, refugee spaces, backrooms, and online chat groups. These are movements built on trust, lived experiences, solidarity, and a refusal to remain invisible.
We would like to highlight five key themes emerging from our research1, revealing how community-led organising efforts evolve through crisis response, trust-building, inclusive leadership, legal adversity, and emotional resilience. Collectively, they illustrate a powerful truth: in the margins of legality and recognition, migrant and refugee communities are quietly rewriting the politics of care, dignity, and labour justice in Malaysia. These testimonies reveal a vibrant ecosystem of mutual aid, advocacy, and solidarity that persists despite challenges, legal invisibility, and institutional neglect.
Organising Strategies in Practice
Organising through Crisis Response and Daily Survival
For migrant workers and refugees in Malaysia, the crisis is not an exception but a daily reality. From workplace injuries, extortion, wage theft to immigration raids, detention, and housing insecurity, community members navigate a hostile environment where state protection is largely absent. In this context, organising begins not with rallies or policy proposals, but with responding to crises, being present, helping, and surviving collectively. These day-to-day actions form the bedrock of long-term collective mobilisation, as shared below:
“If there’s a robbery, fire, accident…we don’t wait…As community leaders, we respond first…maybe they are unable to connect to their friends. Then we sort out what to do next.” – Nepali community organiser.
This immediacy of care, especially in moments of trauma, is what makes grassroots organisers indispensable to their communities. They serve as informal caseworkers and emergency responders, stepping in where official systems fail or actively discriminate, as shared by the organisers.
“They call us and say, ‘My brother was taken.’ We don’t sleep until we know where he is.” – Pakistani refugee community organiser
“If someone hasn’t been paid in three months… We’ll go together. It’s harder to deny a group than an individual.” – Bangladeshi community organiser
“Sometimes just having someone listen changes everything. Especially for women—they feel invisible otherwise.” – Bangladeshi woman community organiser
What begins as a one-time intervention flourishes into sustained organising. When community members see someone consistently show up at the hospital, police station, and workplace disputes, they begin to trust not just the individual, but the idea of community solidarity. These “micro-wins” form a narrative of collective efficacy.
“If someone is hurt or arrested, they call us first…even before calling their family. Because they know we will come.” – Myanmar refugee community organiser
Organisers emphasised that these early interventions are about presence. In that presence lies a transformative community project: the building of community agency in a context where people are somewhat invisible. The relationship built through crisis response is powerful because it is grounded in lived experience. People lack trust in institutions, but they trust individuals who have shown up. This credibility becomes the gateway to deeper forms of organising: forming worker committees, documenting abuses, and demanding institutional change.
“When we help them in crisis, they come back. They bring others. And soon, we’re a big movement.” – Myanmar refugee community organiser
This mode of organising reflects an ethic of solidarity. Leaders do not parachute in to solve problems, but through survival-oriented solidarity as they live the same precarious conditions. These daily acts scaffold larger structures such as informal unions, case tracking, and mobilisations.
Building Trust Through Non-Transactional Engagement
In communities conditioned by exploitation, committed by recruitment agents, employers, and/or intermediaries, trust is a scarce but critical currency. Community leaders rebuild faith in collective action by refusing to replicate extractive dynamics, which are self-serving. Unlike many top-down interventions that may treat migrants as passive beneficiaries, grassroots movements are rooted in presence, empathy, and integrity. Leaders operate on a guiding principle: no one is charged for help.
“We didn’t collect a single cent from any migrant. That’s not the way. They must feel protected…not exploited.” – Nepali community organiser
Organisers described a model of accountability grounded in voluntary contributions (chanda), financial transparency, and collective decision-making. In this ethic of care, dignity is restored through mutual respect and non-extractive relations.
“When we work from the heart, trust follows. Then the people themselves contribute. That’s how we build.” – Myanmar refugee community organiser
Trust built this way becomes organising infrastructure. It facilitates mobilisation in times of crisis, sustains long-term community structures, and resists co-optation schemes.
Embracing Inclusion Across Ethnic, Religious, and Gender Lines
In fragmented contexts where ethnicity, language, and religion often reinforce social divides, inclusive organising is both a value and a strategy. Some community leaders have chosen to build across differences, recognising that marginalisation unites more than identity divides. The Myanmar Ethnic Organisation (MEO), for example, emerged precisely because mono-ethnic networks left too many behind, especially smaller, unrecognised groups and mixed-ethnicity families.
“We accept all ethnicities and religions…even the ones [Rohingya] Myanmar doesn’t recognise. In Malaysia, we are all refugees.” – Myanmar refugee community organiser
Faith-based communities like the Ahmadiyya Muslim network recreated their transnational organisational frameworks in exile. With sub-groups across Malaysia, they maintain substructures for women, youth, girls, and children that operate autonomously.
“Even I, as a male leader, cannot enter the women’s space. It’s theirs. That’s safety, that’s power.” – Pakistani refugee community organiser
Such efforts demonstrate that inclusion is a principle of organising methods. This is especially evident in the rise of women-led outreach among migrant communities. In the Bangladeshi and Indonesian networks, women organisers are forming resilient, gender-responsive networks through informal outreach and digital connection.
“They felt seen…finally. They shared numbers, stories, and songs. We became a network.” – Bangladeshi women community organiser
Together, these models show that organising power grows strongest not through uniformity, but through intentionally building inclusive spaces where dignity, difference, and shared vulnerability are all part of the fabric.
Precarity as an Organising Barrier and Motivation
The lack of legal recognition as workers, asylum seekers, or community representatives remains a central barrier to effective organising. Community leaders repeatedly emphasised that UNHCR’s limited engagement and selective acknowledgement of grassroots groups undermine their ability to secure basic protections.
“We want to work together. But you get discriminated against… [They] say, oh! You are not recognised by UNHCR. Without that letter, we can’t access anything. That’s the problem.” – Myanmar refugee community organiser
This lack of recognition has real consequences. Refugees, even those with UNHCR cards, are frequently subjected to police harassment, arrest, and extortion. As one refugee community leader noted:
“Even if you have the card, the authorities can stop you, take your money, or your phone. Sometimes they accuse you of crimes you didn’t commit…”
Migrant workers, especially those “undocumented”, face exploitative conditions with little recourse: withheld wages, substandard living conditions, and workplace abuse. These constraints, however, have also catalysed grassroots leadership. Many community leaders found themselves compelled to organise not by choice, but by necessity.
“Why not, if I can do something for me, why not I can do something for others? They all are like my aunties, like my own mother’s age.” – Bangladeshi woman community organiser
“Because I’m from the same country, they trust me…not the system. I had to step in, even if I wasn’t ready.” – Nepali community organiser
These grassroots actors have since evolved into mediators, protectors, and organisers navigating the cracks of a system that refuses to fully recognise them, while building networks strong enough to hold their communities together.
Cultural Intelligence and Emotional Infrastructure
Organising within migrant and refugee communities is not just about coordination and logistics; it is deeply emotional labour. Community organisers described creating spaces of psychological safety, listening without judgment, and tending to invisible wounds of trauma, fear, and isolation.
“Time is the best investment for trust. Sit with them. Listen. Share tea. Ask about their families. That’s how hearts change.” – Nepali community organiser
This slow, relational approach builds more than networks—it builds healing spaces, especially for women who have endured years of invisibility and fear. A Bangladeshi woman leader described how older domestic workers opened up to her not because of official credentials, but because she cared for them:
“They feel like I am their own—like a daughter, a niece. I sit, I talk, I drink tea. Then they start to share.” – Bangladeshi community organiser
Another refugee community woman leader shared that emotional safety is the main need:
“Sometimes what they need is just a quiet space. We give them that. No pressure. Just presence.”
Such “emotional infrastructure” is rarely quantified, yet it is the glue holding organising ecosystems together. It creates sustainable cultures of care and fosters long-term solidarity.
What We Learned
Recognise Community-Based Organising as Labour Infrastructure
The migrant and refugee community organisers function as informal unions, social welfare departments, and learning centres. They fill the gaps left by the state and other systems. Stakeholders must stop seeing them as ‘beneficiaries’ and start recognising them as co-strategists and co-implementers. Integrating migrant-led groups into national and global discussions is essential for inclusive decision-making.
Support Safe and Legal Channels for Worker Organising
Legal restrictions on refugee rights to work and migrant unionisation silence vulnerable voices. Yet the risks of not organising, as seen in cases of forced labour, domestic violence, and preventable deaths, are far greater. Policy reforms must expand legal protections, not just for unionised formal workers, but also for undocumented workers organising informally.
Adopt Intersectional and Trauma-Informed Approaches
Organising must take into account the intersectional vulnerabilities across gender, religion, language, and legal status that shape migrant and refugee lives. Leaders are already practising this: building women-only spaces, offering multilingual support, and creating trauma-informed engagements. Training, funding, and partnerships must prioritise capacity building in these areas for both community leaders and humanitarian organisations.
Shift from Charity to Solidarity
Migrant and refugee leaders do not want saviours; instead, they want equitable partners. Rather than duplicating efforts, stakeholders should invest in amplifying what already works. Civil society, unions, and funders should co-develop programs and projects with grassroots leaders and ensure decision-making power is shared.
From Recognition to Redistribution
The stories and strategies from Malaysia’s migrant and refugee organisers reveal a profound truth: the power of organising lies not in formality, but in solidarity. These communities have built what systems have failed to provide in terms of safety, dignity, and voice. Yet their leadership remains under-recognised, under-funded, and under threat.
Ways to Move Forward
To move forward, stakeholders such as international development organisations, governments, labour unions, and funding agencies must transition from recognition to redistribution, especially in the areas of resources, protection, visibility, and trust.
Firstly, direct and long-term funding are important to migrant- and refugee-led organisations. While most migrant and refugee-led organisations in Malaysia are not registered societies, this should not be a barrier to applying for and receiving grants. Long-term funds should be made directly to organisations, through “shared infrastructure” whereby stakeholders share resources and own up to responsibilities. Current models where NGOs help become fiscal partners for the informal communities help fill these gaps. “Flexible grants”, rather than fixed ones, are transformative for community-based organisations. They allow growth beyond rigid development indicators, supporting organic, long-term struggles that defy textbook solutions. Though it may seem idealistic, this approach is essential for such organisations.
Secondly, recognise informal networks/collectives as ‘genuine’ organisations that exist to help migrants and refugees. Creating accessible, migrant-led grievance systems backed by unions and NGOs is important, as many communities face many barriers to gaining legitimacy in the eyes of the public and the local government. Coalition building together with current legally registered NGOs and even via the embassies provides the moral infrastructure to compel these networks and collectives to be recognised. This should open doors for policy-makers, government officials, and many others in positions of power and influence to welcome migrants and refugees as stakeholders of equal capacity and calibre.
Thirdly, as migrant struggles are erased or distorted in mainstream narratives, a collaborative data hub should focus on capturing and centring migrant voices, thereby increasing visibility. These hubs will also become an archive documenting migrants’ and refugees’ struggles, strategies, and stories, cementing the memory of networking and collaboration in the history books of organising and collectivism.
Finally, power must shift to prevent the tokenisation and mistrust of migrant and refugee groups. Stakeholders must commit to co-creating narratives and making decisions collectively. These communities must own their stories, not just serve as subjects. By redistributing power to those already leading the struggle, we can foster a new labour movement—one that is transnational, inclusive, and grounded in lived experience and solidarity.
The authors wish to acknowledge and thank Solidar Suisse and Porticus for their support in undertaking this research. Gratitude to intern, Aminath Anoof, and all community organizers, who cannot be named here, but have contributed to this article.
- This article draws from primary research and focus group discussions conducted in May 2025 with community leaders from Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar, Pakistan, and Indonesia. It is grounded in their lived experiences and organising journeys. The analysis presented here reflects their voices, strategies, and wisdom, not as case studies of vulnerability, but as testimonies of collective beliefs, strength and agency. Visit our website for more information: https://linktr.ee/northsouthinitiative and https://nsinitiative.net/
