A/HRC/44/40/Add.1 21. The poverty line has drawn extensive domestic and international criticism. In October 2018, a senior government official acknowledged that as Malaysia “became a middle-income nation, we didn’t increase the standard for what is considered decent living above the poverty line. So now it’s a very low bar that we have. We need to increase the poverty line index to reach the level of a living wage”. 30 According to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the current poverty measure is “inappropriately low for an upper-middle-income country and does not capture the true extent of deprivation in the population”.31 22. Virtually all independent analysis has concluded that a more realistic poverty measure would yield a much higher poverty rate. The highly respected economist Martin Ravallion found that, compared to countries with a roughly similar average income, one would expect the poverty line in Malaysia to include around 20 per cent of the population. 32 The Khazanah Research Institute found that a relative poverty measure of 60 per cent of median income would show 22.2 per cent of households in poverty as of 2016. 33 In a submission to the Special Rapporteur in 2019, UNICEF said that a relative poverty measure, similar to that adopted by most countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), would place around 16 per cent of the population in poverty.34 23. In the past, Malaysia has responded to critiques by introducing additional ways of measuring poverty, but has avoided meaningfully adjusting the national poverty line. In the Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006–2010 the bottom 40 per cent of the population (B40) was prioritized. In the Eleventh Malaysia Plan 2016–2020 a multidimensional poverty index was introduced.35 The mid-term review of the Eleventh Plan introduced a relative poverty measure for “low income households” earning between the national poverty line and 50 per cent of the national median household income (RM 980–2,614, or US$ 2 41–643), 36 encompassing 15.5 per cent of households. 37 24. But even the new multi-dimensional poverty index, described by officials at the Ministry of Economic Affairs as the future of poverty measurement in the country, 38 yields figures that are so low as to beggar belief. 39 Even though 30.51 per cent of people experienced multiple forms of deprivation within a particular period in 2016, the multidimensional poverty index yields an astonishingly low rate of 0.86 per cent, thus largely replicating the discredited national poverty measure, while at the same time allowing Malaysia to announce and immediately cross a new finish line. 40 III. Data collection and transparency 25. Malaysia stands out among its peers for its lack of transparency around publicly held data and other information. Unlike the great majority of similarly situated countries, Malaysia does not provide full access to key household survey microdata,41 stifling both governmental and independent research and analysis on poverty and inequality. When 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 6 “Malaysia’s poverty line too low, says Kian Ming”, The Star Online, 19 October 2018. Submission by UNICEF Malaysia, available from www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Poverty/Visits Contributions/Malaysia/UNICEF.pdf, p. 1. Martin Ravallion, “Has Malaysia virtually eliminated poverty?” Khazanah Research Institute, “The absolute vs relative poverty conundrum,” pp. 5–6. Submission by UNICEF Malaysia, p. 1. Ministry of Economic Affairs, Mid-term Review of the Eleventh Malaysia Plan 2016–2020, ch. 11, pp. 9–10. Ibid., ch. 11, p. 2. Khazanah Research Institute, “The absolute vs relative poverty conundrum”, p. 5. Information provided at a meeting at the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Department of Statistics on 20 August 2019. Submission by UNICEF Malaysia, p. 2. Ministry of Economic Affairs, Mid-term Review of the Eleventh Malaysia Plan 2016–2020, ch. 11, p. 10. Martin Ravallion, “Has Malaysia Virtually Eliminated Poverty?