Singapore is open to chemical castration for sex offenders if evidence shows it can reduce crime.
Malaysia has considered the same measure before, while South Korea, Indonesia and Thailand have already taken very different approaches.
That gives Malaysia a chance to study the results before deciding if this is a move worth taking.
Singapore wants proof
Singapore recorded 762 molestation cases and 261 rape cases in the first six months of 2026.
Senior Minister K. Shanmugam said the Government is open to pharmacological anti-androgen treatment, commonly known as chemical castration, if there is clear evidence it reduces crime.
He said the evidence remains inconclusive.
Singapore already imposes heavy penalties for serious sexual offences, including lengthy imprisonment and caning.
It has also introduced the Sentence for Enhanced Public Protection, allowing certain serious violent and sexual offenders to remain detained beyond their minimum sentence if they continue to pose a threat to the public.
Chemical castration works differently. Anti-androgen drugs suppress testosterone and reduce sexual drive. The effects last only while treatment continues.
The question, then, is whether reducing sexual drive actually reduces sexual offending. Other countries have spent years testing that question.
South Korea shows its potential
South Korea became the first Asian country to introduce chemical castration for certain sex offenders in 2011.
Research involving Korean sex offenders found that hormonal treatment reduced the frequency and intensity of sexual drive, masturbation and sexual fantasies.
A separate Korean Institute of Criminology and Justice study reported a 92% reduction in the risk of sexual recidivism among offenders receiving hormonal treatment.
The treatment has limits though.
It targets sexual drive, not every factor behind sexual violence. The Korean research also documented spikes in testosterone and hypersexual impulses after treatment stopped.
South Korea therefore offers evidence that chemical castration can reduce sexual reoffending among some offenders but it does not show that the treatment prevents sexual violence across the board.
Indonesia shows the implementation problem
Indonesia introduced chemical castration for certain perpetrators of sexual violence against children in 2020.
The policy has faced resistance from the medical profession.
Research into its implementation has highlighted the conflict between compulsory chemical castration and doctors' professional ethics, while human rights groups have condemned the punishment as cruel and degrading.
There is also a practical problem.
Chemical castration is continuing medical treatment, not a single procedure. It requires medical administration, monitoring and funding over time.
Indonesia shows how quickly a seemingly straightforward punishment becomes complicated once doctors, treatment and long-term supervision enter the picture.
Thailand treats it as treatment
Thailand took a different route.
Its framework allows eligible sex offenders to voluntarily undergo hormone-suppressing treatment following medical assessment, with treatment linked to the possibility of early release.
The approach puts chemical castration inside a broader rehabilitation framework rather than treating it as punishment on its own.
That distinction is also reflected in the UK, where libido-suppressing medication is being expanded as a voluntary treatment alongside psychological support for selected offenders.
The programme is aimed particularly at offenders with persistent and intrusive sexual urges, rather than treating every sex offender as a candidate for medication.
Psychological treatment remains necessary because sexual offending can involve factors beyond sexual desire, including power and control.
Malaysia has already considered it
Malaysia first seriously raised chemical castration in 2016.
Then Women, Family and Community Development Minister Rohani Abdul Karim said the Government would study its effectiveness and suitability for paedophiles after several MPs raised the issue in Parliament.
The proposal resurfaced in 2026, with the People's Progressive Party calling for chemical castration and tougher prison sentences for sex offenders.
Malaysia has not adopted chemical castration as a criminal sentence.
It already has a dedicated legal framework for sexual offences against children, including imprisonment and whipping for serious offences under the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017.
The question for Malaysia is therefore whether another punishment will prevent another offence.
Malaysia should learn before legislating
South Korea provides evidence that hormonal treatment can reduce sexual reoffending.
Indonesia shows the problems that arise when compulsory treatment meets medical ethics and implementation.
Thailand and the UK offer a different model, where medication is targeted at selected offenders and combined with assessment, rehabilitation and psychological treatment.
If chemical castration is introduced, the system would need clear criteria for identifying offenders who may benefit, independent medical and psychological assessment, continued treatment, monitoring after release and a clear plan for when treatment stops.
Without those safeguards, Malaysia risks adding another severe sentence without addressing the conditions that allow offenders to reoffend.
Chemical castration may have a place in Malaysia's response to sexual crime, but it should only become law if the evidence shows it makes people safer.