Summary

Rumah Jeffery is an Indigenous Iban community deep in the rainforest of Sarawak, on the uniquely biodiverse island of Borneo, Malaysia. The community numbers about 60 members, presided by a village chief, who reside in a traditional longhouse stretching over nearly 40 meters along the banks of the Belawit River.

Rumah Jeffery’s members forage for edible plants, harvest fruit trees planted by their ancestors, and set fish traps in the numerous tributaries running through their forest. Hunters stalk game at a clearing where giant butterflies circle overhead. The forest provides rattan vines, which weavers—generally women—bind to produce mats, baskets, and backpacks. The community cultivates vegetables for their own consumption and cash crops like peppercorns, which they sell in local markets.

The forest is a cornerstone of Rumah Jeffery’s identity as a community, which manages an area of 521 hectares of “native customary land,” one of five land classifications under Sarawak’s Land Code of 1958. Rumah Jeffery residents commune with forest spirits, and they carefully maintain their ancestors’ burial grounds in the forest. A chief of customs oversees rituals to the tune of the engkerumong, an Iban xylophone. When they are not away at school, Iban children enjoy hours of play chasing each other in the forest, sliding down mud slopes, and swimming in rivers.

Click to expand Image

Similar to many Indigenous communities in Sarawak, Rumah Jeffery faces challenges in accessing basic services. The rural community does not have access to running water, is not connected to the country’s electricity grid, and does not have a land title that signals formal recognition by the government of their customary land rights. This has made Rumah Jeffery vulnerable to encroachment and harassment by a Malaysian logging company, Zedtee Sdn Bhd (Zedtee), a member of the timber giant Shin Yang Group.

The Sarawak government granted Zedtee a lease to establish a timber plantation, Anap Belawit Management Area LPF 0039, that overlaps with the eastern half of Rumah Jeffery’s territory. The operations require clearing the natural forest and replacing it with a tree farm. Zedtee also has a logging concession that overlaps with the western half of Rumah Jeffery, Anap Muput Forest Management Unit (FMU) T/4317.

Community members told Human Rights Watch they have never consented to relinquishing their land or forest resources to Zedtee. Nonetheless, in 2022, Zedtee logged a part of Rumah Jeffery’s forest without their free, prior, and informed consent, a long-established principle of international law that refers to the right of Indigenous peoples to give or withhold their consent for any endeavor that would affect their lands, territories, or resources.

The company felled valuable fruit trees the community had cared for and harvested for decades, resulting overall in the loss of nearly eight hectares of tree cover in 2022, according to annual global-scale forest loss data produced by Global Land Analysis and Discovery (GLAD) laboratory at the University of Maryland in partnership with Global Forest Watch (GFW). Residents said they confronted the bulldozers, telling the operators to stop the logging. In response, the Sarawak Forest Department reportedly threatened to arrest them.

Zedtee went on to file a complaint against Rumah Jeffery, accusing the community of encroaching on the company’s lease and demanding their removal. In response, the Sarawak Forest Department issued an eviction order against the community in October 2022. The village chief has sought to overturn the order by appealing to multiple government offices, without an official response thus far. The community stands to lose not just their land but their way of life. 

If the Sarawak Forest Department carried out the eviction, it would amount to a forced eviction in violation of the community’s internationally recognized human rights. The authorities issued the eviction notice to Rumah Jeffery in a way that denied them any opportunity to challenge the government’s decision or participate in the process that led to it. No offer of alternative housing or compensation was made to the community, which has not consented to leaving their territory. Removal would be against the will of community members, as the community indicated in a letter to the Sarawak Land and Survey Department.

While Sarawak land laws are generally inadequate to protect the internationally recognized human rights of Indigenous peoples, Human Rights Watch found the state did not even uphold those in the handling of Rumah Jeffery’s case and Zedtee’s conduct. Section 15 of the Sarawak Land Code requires that native customary land first be “terminated” by the state or “surrendered” by the community and compensation paid to those who lost land, before anything can be done on the land.

Forcibly evicting Rumah Jeffery would uproot the community and leave them destitute. Zedtee, by logging in their forests without the community’s free, prior, and informed consent, has failed to meet its responsibilities to respect Rumah Jeffery’s collective rights over their lands and resources under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

Zedtee appears to have also violated the terms of the Malaysian Timber Certification Standard (MTCS), a certification program mandatory for forest plantations in Sarawak, by denying the community’s right to manage their forest.

The conduct of Zedtee towards Rumah Jeffery, and the government’s support for the company as it sought to evict the community, is one example of a situation that numerous Indigenous communities face across Sarawak. Timber plantations, such as Zedtee’s concession LPF 0039 that encroaches on Rumah Jeffery, are now the leading driver of deforestation in Sarawak.

The Sarawak government’s refusal to publish maps of leases or surveyed Indigenous territories has meant there is no comprehensive assessment of the number of people affected. One study by the Malaysian environmental nonprofit group RimbaWatch that assessed open-source information and maps of Indigenous territories drawn by communities themselves found that known concessions overlapped with at least 246,177 hectares of native customary land in Sarawak.

In 2023, Sarawak’s exports of wood products were worth MYR 2.3 billion (about US$560 million). State officials are aiming for growth, hoping to take advantage of rapidly rising demand for wood pellets, which are burned to generate energy. According to Sarawak’s export data, France, the Netherlands, Japan, and South Korea import large quantities of these pellets from Sarawak. The United States is the largest buyer of flooring wood products exported by Sarawak in recent years, and second largest buyer of wooden furniture.

Shin Yang Group is among the firms that manufactures wood pellets, floor base plywood for hardwood flooring, sawn timber, and wooden furniture, among others. Shin Yang advertises Japan, Europe, and the United States as markets for their wood products.

At the time of publication, neither Shin Yang nor Zedtee had replied to Human Rights Watch letters requesting their comments for this report.

Human Rights Watch urges Zedtee to withdraw its complaint with the Sarawak Forest Department, and to excise Rumah Jeffery, as well as all native customary land, from the Anap Muput FMU and the Anap Belawit Management Area. Further, Zedtee should compensate the community for the unauthorized activities on their territory. SIRIM, the auditing firm in charge of granting or revoking certification under the MTCS, should require Zedtee to take the necessary corrective actions.

Human Rights Watch also urges the Sarawak Forest Department to revoke the eviction order against the Rumah Jeffery community and to revoke Zedtee’s permit for LPF0039. To ensure non-repetition of these abuses, Human Rights Watch calls upon the Sarawak premier’s office to propose a reform to the Sarawak Land Code that would bring it in line with international standards on Indigenous rights, in particular the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The reform of the Sarawak Land Code should repeal provisions that arbitrarily cap the size of Indigenous territories and that allow the government to forcibly evict Indigenous people from their lands. It should also shift the burden to the state and businesses in litigation over native customary land. Human Rights Watch also urges the premier’s office to instruct agencies to publish maps showing where native customary land has been surveyed and where land leases have been granted to companies.

Jurisdictions that import Sarawak’s wood products should inspect these with a view to forestall entry of products tainted by illegality, deforestation, and human rights abuses. Specifically, France, Japan, the Netherlands and the United States should enforce laws on their books that regulate trade in wood products: the EU Regulation on Deforestation-Free Products (EUDR), Japan’s Clean Wood Act, and the US Lacey Act Amendment of 2008. Other major importers of Sarawak’s wood products, like South Korea, should take steps to adopt similar laws and avoid contributing to global deforestation and human rights abuses.

Methodology

Human Rights Watch conducted research for this report between July 2023 and March 2025. We interviewed 44 Indigenous leaders, environmentalists, lawyers, academics, and journalists in Kuala Lumpur, Kuching, Miri, and the Upper Baram area in Malaysia. In September 2024, Human Rights Watch researchers traveled to Rumah Jeffery in the Ulu Belawit area of Sarawak and interviewed nine Indigenous community members and two staff members of the Sarawak Dayak Iban Association (SADIA), a nongovernmental organization that supports the Rumah Jeffery community.

Human Rights Watch also reviewed reports by academics and environmental and Indigenous organizations; news articles; open-source data; Malaysian legislation and policies; and public statements made by Malaysian officials from the federal government and state government of Sarawak. Researchers also reviewed surveillance audits of the Anap-Muput Forest Management Unit (T/4317) and the License for Planted Forests LPF 0039, Zedtee Sdn Bhd company documents, community maps, maps produced by the British colonial government, letters that Rumah Jeffery community leaders sent to the Sarawak Land and Survey Department and Forest Department, as well as letters that the community received from these government agencies.

Human Rights Watch analyzed satellite imagery of the Ulu Belawit area captured over several decades showing the evolution of the area’s deforestation, as well as geospatial datasets to assess global forest change between 2000-2023, georeferenced maps of the Anap Muput Forest Management Unit T/4317 and of the Anap Belawit Management Area LPF 0039, and old topographic maps showing the historical presence of the Rumah Jeffery community. During the September 2024 research trip, researchers collected GPS coordinates of different points of interest and captured geolocated photographs and videos, including logged areas within and around Rumah Jeffery.

In November 2023, Human Rights Watch met with representatives of Malaysia’s Ministry of Plantation and Commodities, the Malaysian Palm Oil Board, and the Malaysian Palm Oil Certification Council. In September 2024, Human Rights Watch met with the chief of enforcement at the Bintulu regional office of the Sarawak Forest Department to request comment on the findings of this report.

In May 2024, Human Rights Watch wrote to the minister of plantation and commodities requesting comments on our findings that Sarawak was a high-risk area for deforestation and violations of Indigenous peoples’ rights. At the time of writing, neither the minister nor any other federal official had replied.

On February 12, 2025, Human Rights Watch provided its preliminary findings and requested comment from Zedtee, Shin Yang, SIRIM, the MTCC, and the Sarawak Land and Survey Department in Bintulu. Human Rights Watch also sent a letter requesting additional information from the Sarawak Forest Department.

The MTCC replied on March 3, 2025, providing additional information on their standard but did not provide comments on our findings. On March 10, 2025, the MTCC Director of Forest Management held an online meeting with Human Rights Watch and provided additional comments on our findings. On March 11, 2025, the MTCC CEO addressed a second letter to Human Rights Watch providing additional information. The Sarawak Forest Department replied on February 27, 2025. At the time of publication, none of the other entities had responded.

I. Sarawak’s Timber Industry

The Devastating Effects of Deforestation

In 1960, 90 percent of Sarawak was covered with primary forest, compared to less than 10 percent today.[1] The large-scale clearances have given way to expansive oil palm and timber monocultures. Commercial plantations have relentlessly encroached on Indigenous land, in the face of outspoken resistance from many of the affected communities who have set up roadblocks, brought legal challenges, and campaigned for protection of their forests.[2]  

Deforestation has had devastating impacts on traditional livelihoods and ways of life. Indigenous communities lost edible and medicinal plants, game, fruit trees, fish, and sources of water. In addition, communities also lost sites of spiritual significance, as graveyards and places where forest spirits are thought to dwell were razed and plantations swallowed them up.

The loss of forest resources also compromises the transmission of traditional knowledge and culture. For instance, weavers struggle to pass on their skills to the next generation as the vines they procured in the forest disappear. In the most extreme cases, Indigenous people who previously lived as nomads have been forced to settle, because the forest that sustained them vanished.[3]

While there is no comprehensive assessment, given the Sarawak government’s longstanding refusal to publish maps of leases or surveyed Indigenous territories, one conservative estimate found that known concessions overlapped with at least 246,177 hectares of native customary land.[4]

Currently, deforestation continues to make inroads in Sarawak and the country at large, despite misleading claims to the contrary from Malaysia’s highest-ranking officials.[5]

Between 2017 and 2021, Sarawak accounted for nearly a third of Malaysia’s total deforested land—more than any other state in the country.[6] More recently, data from Global Forest Watch, an interactive online forest monitoring and alert system managed by the World Resources Institute, estimates that Malaysia lost about 70,000 hectares of primary forest in 2022 alone, an area about seven times the size of Paris.[7]

Timber Plantations

Timber plantations are projected to be the largest driver of future deforestation in Malaysia in general, and in Sarawak in particular.[8] These plantations require clearing naturally regenerating, biodiverse forest to establish tree monocultures, often consisting of non-native species such as acacia.[9]

The Sarawak Forest Department is aiming to establish at least one million hectares of these so-called “planted forests” by 2025 (Licenses for Planted Forests or LPFs).[10] However, the Malaysian nongovernmental climate organization RimbaWatch estimated that Sarawak had already earmarked 1.8 million hectares of naturally regenerating forest for conversion to timber plantations from 2023 onwards.[11]

In 2024, RimbaWatch also estimated that 207,762 hectares of existing licenses for timber plantations overlap with Indigenous territories, a conservative estimate given the limited information publicly available.[12]

The Sarawak government promotes the LPF program as one that will relieve pressure on natural forests to provide timber and rehabilitate degraded forests. In practice, however, the LPF program is the main driver of deforestation in Sarawak and a major cause of encroachment on Indigenous land.[13]

Sarawak’s Ambitions for Wood Pellet Manufacturing

Wood pellets are used globally as fuel for boilers or even industrial electricity generation. The wood pellet industry was worth over US$18 billion in 2023.[14] The European Union is the largest market for pellets, consuming more than half of its global production in 2022.[15] Japan and South Korea are quickly catching up, aided by generous state subsidies for bioenergy.[16]

Malaysia’s timber industry has taken notice. Between 2019 and 2023, the country’s exports of wood pellets reportedly grew by MYR 241.6 million (over $54 million).[17]

Sarawak’s wood pellet production, which naturally requires timber, is integral to this national effort. Sarawak Premier Abang Johari Openg led a delegation to a Norwegian pellet factory in 2023, hailing the product as a “new area of business for us.”[18]

Sarawak Deputy Premier Awang Tengah said at an industry event in March 2024 that the government would “empower” timber firms to increase their wood pellet production.[19] Between 2022 and 2023, the volume of wood pellets produced by the state had already jumped by 130 percent.[20]

Meanwhile, in May 2024, Sarawak’s minister of international trade, industry and investment said the government was studying the feasibility of converting existing coal-fired power plants into wood pellet plants.[21] He added the state wanted to leverage incentives now being offered by the federal government, such as an investment tax allowance for biomass.[22]

The wood pellet industry tends to emphasize that its product consists of sawmill “waste” – sawdust or wood chips left on the factory floor after turning round logs into rectangular products. Wood pellets are thus promoted as integral to a sustainable, circular economy that optimizes waste. In practice, investigations and whistleblowers have repeatedly denounced companies using whole logs just to produce wood pellets, rather than these being a byproduct of other manufacturing.[23]

Overall, without a correction of policy direction, wood pellet production is likely to increase pressure on Sarawak’s rainforest, creating an increased demand for timber to manufacture this new product and, without meaningful reform, likely driving encroachment into Indigenous peoples’ forests.

Destinations of Sarawak Wood Products

Given the absence of mechanisms to trace wood products to the plot of land the timber originated from, and a general lack of transparency for the industry, there are significant details that are not public regarding the destination of wood products from Sarawak.

The limited information publicly available (and summarized below) indicates that the EU, Japan, and the United States are important destinations for exports of Sarawak’s wood products. All these jurisdictions adopted laws requiring businesses to conduct due diligence and place limitations on the imports of wood products originating from illegal deforestation.

Additionally, the EU adopted a law requiring various products, including wood pellets, to be deforestation free and to respect the principle of “free, prior, and informed consent” as defined in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The EU is slated to begin enforcing the law in 2026.

Shin Yang Group, Zedtee’s parent company, is among the Malaysian firms that manufactures wood pellets, floor base plywood for hardwood flooring, sawn timber, and wooden furniture, among other products.[24] Shin Yang Group advertises Japan, Europe, and the United States as markets for its wood products.[25]

Wood pellets

In 2023, France received 48 percent of pellet exports, in terms of volume, from Sarawak, with Japan and South Korea importing the remaining share. In 2024, wood pellets were only sent to two destinations: Japan, which accounted for about 85 percent of the pellet exports, in terms of volume, and the Netherlands, which received the remaining 20,000 tonnes.[26]

Sawn timber

In 2023, Japan was the sixth most important destination for Sarawak’s sawn timber exports, maintaining that position in 2024.[27]

Plywood

In both terms of volume and value, Japan was by far the most important destination for Sarawak plywood.[28] 

Flooring

In 2023, the US bought 79 percent of Sarawak’s exports of laminated board/flooring. In 2024, the US increased its share, receiving 86 percent. [29]

Furniture

Between 2022 and 2024, Japan and the United States received the vast majority of Sarawak’s reported exports of furniture and furniture parts.[30]

II. Rumah Jeffery’s Fight

Human Rights Watch investigated timber company Zedtee’s efforts to evict the Iban Indigenous community Rumah Jeffery. The treatment of Rumah Jeffery by the company and government agencies is one example among many of how Sarawak laws and policies protect company interests and dispossess Indigenous peoples of their territories and natural resources. The predicament of Rumah Jeffery also underscores how the Malaysian Timber Certification Standard (MTCS) is sometimes poorly enforced by auditors. The situation of the community is a localized but powerful illustration of the factors that render Sarawak a high-risk area for deforestation and Indigenous rights violations.

Rumah Jeffery

Click to expand Image

Rumah Jeffery is an Indigenous Iban community, numbering about 60 members, and is presided by a village chief. Families reside in a single traditional longhouse about 40 meters long along the banks of the Belawit River. Residents forage for edible plants, harvest fruit trees planted by their ancestors, and set fish traps in the many tributaries running through their forest, their native customary land. Hunters stalk game at a clearing where giant butterflies circle overhead. The forest also provides rattan vines, which weavers—generally women—bind to produce mats, baskets, backpacks, fish traps, and other everyday objects. The community farms agricultural fields that have been in use since the 1950’s, where they grow vegetables for their own consumption and cash crops like peppercorns, which they sell in local markets.

Rumah Jeffery’s forest is far from just being a commodity. Residents also commune with spiritual beings in the forest, particularly a spirit that is believed to inhabit a waterfall deep into their territory. Traditions and rites are maintained by a chief of customs, Nyulan Ambang, who also practices traditional medicine. When they are not in school, children enjoy hours of play running through the forest, sliding down mud slopes, swimming in rivers, and climbing up waterfalls.

Click to expand Image

Like many Indigenous peoples in Sarawak, Rumah Jeffery does not have a land title that signals the government’s formal recognition of their Indigenous land rights. The Sarawak Land Code establishes arbitrary conditions for titling Indigenous territories, including requiring that there were signs of occupation – such as cultivated fields – of the territory in 1958. Courts assess this requirement in relation to aerial photographs of Borneo taken by the British colonial government at the time, but those are classified under the Official Secrets Act and not available to communities.[31]

The Sarawak Dayak Iban Association (SADIA), an Indigenous nongovernmental organization that supports communities to defend their land rights, found there is evidence of Rumah Jeffery’s presence on the land dating back to the 1950s.[32]

Click to expand Image

SADIA geospatial expert Matek Geram mapped the ancestral territory of the Rumah Jeffery community, locating the boundaries of the community and customary markers that evidence long-time occupation by its inhabitants (see images below). Markers include graveyards, orchards, and sacred sites. Human Rights Watch researchers visited Rumah Jeffery in September 2024, along with Mujah and Geram, and walked with community members to photograph these and other sites.

SADIA overlayed the boundary of the ancestral territory with a copy of a map published in 1975 by the Directorate of Overseas Surveys of the United Kingdom for the Director of National Mapping of Malaysia and found evidence of the persistent occupation of the area claimed by Rumah Jeffery. The 1975 map shows several cultivated areas in Rumah Jeffery that match the areas currently cultivated by the community.

Click to expand Image

Human Rights Watch obtained a copy of the Directorate of Overseas Surveys map published in 1958 from the National Library of Australia and overlayed the boundaries of the territory that SADIA drew.[33] Similar cultivated areas and the presence of huts are visible inside the territory on this map, that is based on air photography from the British Royal Air Force from 1951.

Click to expand Image

The Belawit River, said to be named after one of the community’s ancestors, also already appears with that name on the above maps and on a map from 1934 from the Federated Malay States, further confirming the historical presence of the community in the area.[34]

A satellite image taken in 1972 by the satellite Landsat-1 shows signs of clearances matching with the cultivated areas shown in the 1958 Directorate of Overseas Surveys map, Human Rights Watch found.  

The native customary land currently claimed by the community extends over an area of 521 hectares, according to Human Rights Watch’s assessment of the boundaries produced by SADIA. On the map from 1958, based on air photographs taken in 1951, the cultivated land in their ancestral territory already covered a surface of 34 hectares.

While the community has claimed and cultivated the land for decades, their longhouse was established in mid-2017.[35] The families who currently form Rumah Jeffery peacefully split from the Rumah Mawang village, located across the Belawit River. The families had grown too large to be accommodated in a single longhouse, so their ancestral territories were divided in accordance with Iban tradition, and those who departed continued exercising their customary rights in the forest area and crop fields that were theirs.[36] Thus, while the construction of the longhouse at this location was recent, the community’s customary use of the forest and crop fields are visible on maps dating back to the 1950s.

This history notwithstanding, Rumah Jeffery’s longtime occupation of the territory is disputed by a private company and the Sarawak Forest Department.

Zedtee’s Land Leases

The company Zedtee Sdn Bhd (Zedtee) manages two land leases that overlap with Rumah Jeffery’s territory. Zedtee Sdn Bhd is a member of the Shin Yang Group, one of the six major companies that altogether control 70 percent of forest concessions in Sarawak.[37] Shin Yang advertises wood pellets among the products it manufactures.[38] Shin Yang sells its wood products across Europe, Japan, the United States, and elsewhere.[39] Zedtee Plywood, another Shin Yang associated company, also notes Zedtee Sdn Bhd among its suppliers.[40]

One of the leases that Zedtee manages is Anap-Muput, a forest management unit (FMU). The government authorized the company to conduct selective logging in the area under Timber License No. T/4317.[41] The Anap-Muput FMU encompasses 83,535 hectares, an area about eight times the size of Paris, in the district of Tatau.[42] The Sarawak Forest Department granted Zedtee a 60-year timber license over the area beginning in 2008.[43]

The other lease is Anap Belawit Management Area, where Zedtee obtained a government permit to raze the natural forest and replace it with a tree plantation under license LPF 0039.[44] Human Rights Watch could not locate publicly available information establishing what year Zedtee obtained this concession, nor the terms of the license.

The Sarawak state government mandated that all long-term timber leases, including tree plantations, should be certified under the Malaysian Timber Certification Scheme (MTCS) or the Forest Stewardship Council standards by the end of 2024.[45]

MTCS certification aims to provide for “independent assessment of forest management practices and audit of timber product manufacturers or exporters to ascertain that the timber products … are sourced from sustainably managed forests.”[46] The Malaysian Timber Certification Council (MTCC), a non-governmental organization, manages the MTCS. While incorporated as an NGO, the MTCC’s Board of Trustees, however, is primarily made up of government officials and industry representatives from the timber sector.[47]

Anap-Muput FMU is certified under the MTCS, and at time of writing, its certification was valid until July 2029.[48] On the other hand, LPF0039 is not certified under either the MTCS or the FSC schemes. Human Rights Watch requested information from the Sarawak Forest Department on this matter, but the department did not answer the question.[49] The website of the Sarawak Forest Department did not list LPF 0039 among the certified tree plantations in the state, however.[50] In March 2025, the MTCC CEO wrote to Human Rights Watch that LPF 0039 had not been certified under the MTCS.[51] The FSC’s public database did not list any licenses held by Zedtee.[52]

Rumah Jeffery’s ancestral territory straddles both of the leases that Zedtee manages (see map below).[53]

Click to expand Image

Rumah Jeffery’s Resistance to Zedtee Encroachment

According to Jeffery Nang, the village chief of Rumah Jeffery, in May 2022 Zedtee’s forest manager visited their longhouse.[54] Nang said that the forest manager told him of the company’s plan to log the area but promised compensation in the form of a paved access road and water pipes for the village.[55] In addition, he said each family in the community could mark five trees that Zedtee would spare from logging operations.[56]

Nang said the Zedtee forest manager conducted a site inspection with community members to mark the protected trees, and that he and the company agreed in conversation to put the terms in writing before the logging could proceed. Nang said that during his conversation with Zedtee, he was not told of the scale of the logging or how long it would take.[57]

However, no one from Zedtee returned to draw up a written agreement, Nang told Human Rights Watch. [58] From the village chief’s perspective, this meant that there was no agreement between the community and Zedtee that allowed Zedtee to begin logging.

The Malaysian Timber Certification Scheme (MTCS), under which Anap Muput FMU is accredited and that Zedtee is required to follow for the lease’s management, establishes that “records of consultations with the natives” (sic) is among the documentation that auditors must appraise when determining if a company has upheld the MTCS Criteria. Criterion 3.1 states that “Indigenous peoples shall control forest management of their lands and territories unless they delegate control with free, prior and informed consent to other agencies and/or parties.”[59]

Nonetheless, Zedtee began logging in Rumah Jeffery’s ancestral territory that same year, several community members said.[60] In response, residents twice went out to confront Zedtee’s bulldozers in the forest, protesting the logging, and seeking to protect their marked trees, according to community members who participated in the effort.[61] Nang told Human Rights Watch that they spoke directly to bulldozer operators, but this did not stop the logging. In response to protests, the Forest Department threatened to arrest them, Nang said.[62]

Human Rights Watch analyzed several datasets generated by the University of Maryland, Google, the United States Geological Survey, and NASA and found that since the beginning of 2021, Rumah Jeffery has lost 19.5 hectares of tree cover. Approximately 98 percent of this loss occurred between 2021 and 2022. Among the areas of tree cover loss were sections along logging roads in the western part of Rumah Jeffery, including areas that overlap with the Anap-Muput FMU.

Click to expand Image

When Human Rights Watch researchers visited Rumah Jeffery in September 2024, the services Zedtee reportedly promised to the community still had not been provided. Rumah Jeffery had not received water pipes, and the only access road it had was impassable, which prevents the community from selling their produce and makes it difficult for them to travel to school and medical facilities.[63] The community had about a ton of peppercorns sitting in their communal living room that they were not able to take to the market.

The situation of Rumah Jeffery shows the difficult negotiations that Indigenous communities are sometimes forced into with companies merely to gain access to essential services like running water, or to repair vital infrastructure such as the access road, which the government should in any case provide.

Click to expand Image

With respect to Rumah Jeffery, the community had not consented to the logging, since the terms of the operation were, according to Nang, not put in writing as he had requested as a condition to be met before any logging activities could proceed. Rumah Jeffery lost a part of their forest, including several of the trees that Zedtee reportedly had said it would spare, and had received nothing in return. 

Zedtee’s Efforts to Evict Rumah Jeffery

The Rumah Jeffery community has been threatened with eviction ever since protesting Zedtee’s incursion.

On October 14, 2022, the Forest Department of Sarawak issued Rumah Jeffery an eviction notice.[64] The order said the community was encroaching on “Anap Protected Forest” by inhabiting a longhouse and practicing agriculture on the land.[65] The notice gave the community 30 days to vacate, demolish, and remove any structures, crops, and other property.[66] Failure to do so would lead the Forest Department to bring charges against community members.[67]

The eviction notice stated that the Rumah Jeffery community was in violation of section 26 of the Sarawak Forests Ordinance of 2015.[68] Section 26 prohibits trespassing, felling trees, or erecting buildings in a “protected forest.”[69] The eviction notice implies Rumah Jeffery has been absorbed into “Anap Protected Forest,” where felling trees is prohibited.

However, based on official audits, Rumah Jeffery’s native customary land sits across two concessions obtained by Zedtee, where the company could selectively log or completely raze the natural forest. [70] Furthermore, the official at the Sarawak Forest Department in charge of eventually enforcing the eviction notice told Human Rights Watch that Zedtee had specifically requested that the department evict the community.[71]  

Altogether, it appears the Sarawak Forest Department intends to clear the area of residents to enable Zedtee’s operations, rather than to protect the forest and the community.

The situation illustrates Sarawak’s opaque and convoluted land governance. The state government has classed Rumah Jeffery’s native customary land as a protected forest where logging is prohibited, as a selective logging concession, and as a site to be converted into a tree plantation – three land uses that contradict each other, and all of which disregard the Indigenous community’s rights over the land and its resources.

The eviction notice, dated October 14, 2022, was not given to Jeffery Nang, the village chief, until October 20, 2022. On October 20, Nang went to Rumah Mawang, a neighboring village, to attend a meeting with auditors from SIRIM.[72] SIRIM is tasked with monitoring Zedtee’s compliance with the MTCS standards, and its representatives were conducting a routine site visit that day.[73] An official of the Bintulu Forest Department was there with the auditors, and he gave Nang the letter, asserting orally that the community had to leave, Nang told Human Rights Watch.[74]

Nang quickly returned to the longhouse after receiving the eviction letter.[75] Together with Nyulang Imbang, the village head of adat (customs), they decided to seek the help of the Indigenous organization SADIA.[76] With support from SADIA, the community at an unspecified date sent a letter to the Land and Survey Department headquarters in Kuching, Sarawak, which confirmed receipt on April 17, 2023.[77] The letter requested the department to survey and formally recognize their customary land, in order to remove it from the area on which the company is entitled to operate.[78] The department referred their request to their Kapit Regional Office.[79] In a letter dated October 17, 2023, the Kapit Regional Office also said it was not the proper jurisdiction, referring the community to the Bintulu Regional Office instead.[80] According to the village chief, this was the last communication the community received from the government.

During this time, the community decided to remain in their longhouse. On April 7, 2023, about six months after the eviction order was issued, about seven Forest Department officials and four police officers came to the community, residents told Human Rights Watch.[81] Of those who came, two people registered their visit to the longhouse in a logbook kept by residents. One of the visitors was an official who identified himself as Sawa Sauh of the Bintulu regional office of the Sarawak Forest Department, and the other was a police sergeant.[82]

According to Imbang, the chief of adat, Sauh said they needed to vacate the longhouse because they were encroaching on Zedtee’s license area.[83] The police sergeant then threatened to demolish the longhouse, Imbang said. The police officers who remained outside the longhouse were armed, leading the community to believe they were ready to carry out their order.[84] Imbang recalls telling the police officer that he would not move out even if he were to die on the spot.[85] “I will stay here, I have no other place,” Imbang reportedly said. [86]

Being forcibly evicted would deprive the community of its livelihood and culture, which are inextricably tied to their forest. For generations, the Iban community has relied on its ability to hunt, fish, forage, and plant crops for food.[87] The eviction would sever the community from their ancestral land, which is part of their collective identity, a site of worship, and the place of burial of their ancestors.

For instance, within the Anap-Muput concession is a waterfall revered as a sacred site to Rumah Jeffery.[88] The waterfall is home to a spiritual being to which the community makes regular offerings.[89] The community also has at least two graveyards in the forest, and villagers ensure they regularly visit and keep their ancestors’ graves well-maintained.[90]

Response from the Sarawak Government

Response from the Sarawak Forest Department

In September 2024, Human Rights Watch met with Wilson Ngai, head of enforcement of the Bintulu office of the Sarawak Forest Department. Ngai said the Forest Department served an eviction order on Rumah Jeffery because Zedtee complained of an “illegal occupation in their leasing.”[91] Ngai added that five other villages were also served with eviction orders.[92] While he could not recall the exact date, Ngai said the eviction order had been served during his tenure in Bintulu, which began in January 2022.[93] While saying that Zedtee’s complaint was confidential, he nonetheless confirmed that the content of Zedtee’s complaint was identical to the eviction order served on the community.[94]

Ngai said the reason for the conflict with Zedtee was that Rumah Jeffery had split from Rumah Mawang to build a new longhouse.[95] Yet, the complaint from Zedtee was only filed after the community protested the logging in their ancestral territory, five years after they first built their longhouse. Furthermore, the community did not claim any new territory by building the longhouse. Rather, the ancestral territory previously shared between all the inhabitants of Rumah Mawang was divided so that those departing to build a longhouse in Rumah Jeffery continued to exercise their rights over their native customary land, in line with Iban tradition.[96]

On February 12, 2025, Human Rights Watch wrote to the SFD to request information on whether LPF 0039 had been certified under the MTCS. The SFD replied on February 24 that “the Sarawak Government remains committed to Sustainable Forest Management through its forest management certification policy and best forest management practices,” and that “the management of LPF/0039 aligns with these principles, with monitoring and regulation conducted in accordance with established policies and regulations.”[97]

In a follow-up email from March 19, 2025, an official from the Sarawak Forest Department wrote to Human Rights Watch that LPF/0039 “does not meet the eligibility criteria for MTCS certification due to the cut-off date of 31 December 2010 specified in the Standard,” (sic) but that the area “continues to be managed and monitored in strict accordance with all applicable forest regulations, policies, and laws.”[98] Despite repeated queries from Human Rights Watch, the Forest Department did not explain how their position regarding LPF/0039 was consistent with the Sarawak government’s requirement that all tree plantations be certified under the MTCS or the FSC schemes by the end of 2024.

The MTCC, which manages the MTCS standard, also told Human Rights Watch that LPF 0039 was not certified under the MTCS.[99]

The FSC public database did not list any certificates under the name of Zedtee.[100]

Response from the Sarawak Land and Survey Department

On February 12, 2025, Human Rights Watch wrote to the Sarawak Land and Survey Department requesting their comments on our preliminary findings. On March 6, 2025, the department replied they were preparing an answer, but at the time of publication they had not provided one.[101]

Response from Zedtee and Shin Yang

On February 12, 2025, Human Rights Watch provided a summary of our preliminary findings to Zedtee and Shin Yang in separate letters, requesting their comments and answers to several questions.[102] Neither Zedtee nor Shin Yang had replied at the time of publication.

Response from SIRIM and the MTCC

On February 12, 2025, Human Rights Watch provided a summary of our preliminary findings with SIRIM and the MTCC, requesting their comments and answers to several questions.[103]

SIRIM had not replied at the time of publication.

The MTCC chief executive director replied in a letter dated March 3, 2025.[104] She recalled the structure, functioning, and provisions of the MTCS, but did not provide comment on the specific findings pertaining to the Rumah Jeffery community, nor did she comment on the performance of SIRIM in auditing the Anap-Muput FMU.

In her letter, the MTCC CEO stated that requirements in the MTCS have “resulted in plantation forests established after 31 December 2010 not being certified under the scheme, particularly through Criterion 6.10.” Criterion 6.10 reads: “Plantation established in areas converted from natural forests after 31 December 2010 is not eligible for certification unless it fulfills the requirements stipulated under Criterion 6.11” (emphasis added).

Criterion 6.11 states eight conditions for the “conversion of severely degraded forests to forest plantations,” which include proving that the conversion “does not have negative impacts on ecologically important forest areas, culturally and socially significant areas, or other protected areas.” While the conditions for conversion are numerous and considerably restrictive, the MTCS will allow for conversion of natural forests to timber plantations provided these conditions are met.

On March 11, 2025, the MTCC CEO Dr. Farrah Shameen Binti Mohamad Ashray sent Human Rights Watch a second letter stating that that LPF0039 was not certified under the MTCS, while the Anap-Muput FMU was.[105] Further, Dr. Ashray wrote that the MTCC was reviewing the MTCS to align the standard with the requirements of the EUDR.[106]

Additionally, Dr. Agkillah Maniam, Director of Forest Management at the MTCC, held an online meeting with Human Rights Watch.[107] Dr. Maniam stated that, while there are caveats to the 2010 cut-off date for conversion to forest plantations, the MTCC had not, to date, certified any forest plantation established after 2010.[108]

Dr. Maniam also said that, upon receipt of Human Rights Watch letter, the MTCC had engaged Zedtee about this report’s allegations.[109] Dr. Maniam also said Zedtee forwarded the MTCC a copy of a letter addressed to Human Rights Watch and dated February 25, 2025. At the time of publication, however, Human Rights Watch had not received Zedtee’s letter.[110]  

Delving into more general reforms being undertaken by the MTCC, Dr. Maniam shared the MTCC was working with SIRIM and Control Union, the only certification bodies authorized to conduct MTCS audits, to standardize their guidelines, including the threshold of non-compliances that trigger suspension and revocation of certification.[111] Dr. Maniam also relayed efforts to review FPIC provisions in the MTCS, as well as the MTCC’s complaints mechanism, in preparation for publishing a revised MTCS by the end of 2025.[112]

III. Legal Analysis

International Human Rights Law

Malaysia is obligated to respect international human rights treaties to which it is party and customary international human rights law. As a United Nations member state, Malaysia is deemed to adhere to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is widely considered to reflect customary international human rights law. Malaysia has ratified several international human rights conventions, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Relevant standards that reflect customary international law include the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Malaysia voted in favor at the UN General Assembly, and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which is applicable to both states and companies.

Right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent

The International Court of Justice has recognized the right of all people to self-determination under customary international law. [113] The UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples found that in the context of Indigenous peoples’ rights, the right to self-determination includes the right to have control and to make decisions over their lands and resources.[114]

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) states that Indigenous peoples have a specific right to autonomy or self-government in their internal or local affairs, and that Indigenous peoples shall not be removed from their territories without their free, prior and informed consent.[115]

UNDRIP urges states to obtain free and informed consent from Indigenous communities “prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources.”[116] The UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples recommends that consultations include information on the “nature, size, pace, reversibility, and scope of any proposed project or activity” as well as any social or environmental impact assessments and the kind of compensation or benefit-sharing schemes involved.[117]

There is no evidence that the Rumah Jeffery community consented to its ancestral territory being given in concession to Zedtee, nor to the most recent round of logging. Human Rights Watch found the Sarawak state government violated the Rumah Jeffery community’s right to free, prior, and informed consent, by:

• granting a concession over the community’s ancestral land and failing to ensure the excision of native customary land from the lease;

• authorizing logging in Rumah Jeffery without ensuring the company had obtained the community’s free, prior, and informed consent; and

• ordering the removal of the community from their longhouse and ancestral land without their consent.

Prohibition of Forced Removals

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including … housing.”[118] A corollary of the right to housing is the prohibition of forced evictions, which the UN has defined as “the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection.”[119]

UNDRIP also calls upon states to provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for, “any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing [Indigenous peoples] of their lands, territories or resources.”[120] Further, it directs states to prohibit any forced removal of Indigenous peoples from their lands or territories.[121]

The Sarawak Forest Department eviction order to the Rumah Jeffery community contravenes all of these international standards. The eviction notice was issued to Rumah Jeffery in a way that denied them any opportunity to challenge the government’s decision or participate in the process that led to it. In either the eviction notice or the April 7, 2023, meeting with Forest Department and police officials, no offer of alternative housing or compensation was given.[122] In any case, Rumah Jeffery has not consented to leaving their territory and removal would be against their will, as the community has indicated in its letter to the Land and Survey Department.[123]

If the Sarawak Forest Department enforced the eviction notice, it would be committing a forced eviction in violation of internationally recognized human rights. Zedtee’s efforts to seek the eviction of the Rumah Jeffery community is also contrary to internationally recognized human rights, as is SIRIM’s failure to denounce this conduct in its audits.

Business Responsibility to Respect Human Rights

Business enterprises such as Shin Yang, Zedtee, and SIRIM have human rights responsibilities under the 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UN Guiding Principles).[124] While the UN Guiding Principles are non-binding, they provide important guidance and apply to private organizations involved in commercial activities.[125] The responsibility to respect human rights means that these organizations should have “policies and processes appropriate to their size and circumstances” to:

• Avoid causing or contributing to adverse human rights impacts through their own activities (both actions and omissions) and address such impacts when they occur.[126]

• Prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts that are directly linked to their operations, products or services by their relationships, even if they have not contributed to those impacts.[127]
• “Enable the remediation of any adverse human rights impacts they cause or to which they contribute” and use their business leverage to do so. [128]
• “Communicate externally … particularly when concerns are raised on behalf of affected populations,” and “provide information that is sufficient to evaluate the adequacy of the enterprise’s response.”[129]

Malaysian Timber Certification Standard

The Sarawak Forest Department mandated long-term logging licenses, such as the Anap Muput FMU concession held by Zedtee, to be certified under the Malaysian Timber Certification Standard (MTCS) or Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) by 2022.[130] Forest plantations, such as the LPF0039 held by Zedtee, were required to obtain certification by 2025.[131] However, LPF 0039 is not certified under the MTCS, and the public database managed by FSC did not reflect any licenses being held by Zedtee.[132]

Zedtee’s actions appear to be inconsistent with several principles of the MTCS, even as Zedtee is required to comply with those principles for at least the management of the Anap-Muput FMU which is currently certified through July 2029. (The auditing company SIRIM is responsible for granting or canceling MTCS certification to the Anap-Muput FMU.) Under Principle 2, “Tenure and Use Rights and Responsibilities,” the MTCS requires that:

Local communities with legal or customary tenure or use rights shall maintain control, to the extent necessary to protect their rights or resources, over forest operations unless they delegate control with free, prior, and informed consent to other agencies and/or parties.[133]

Principle 3 on “Indigenous Peoples’ Rights,” recognizes that Indigenous peoples should control forest management on their territories “unless they delegate control” with free, prior, and informed consent to other agencies or parties.[134] To verify compliance with this, companies must keep records of consultations with representatives of Indigenous peoples and records showing control was delegated with free, prior, and informed consent.[135]

To meet the MTCS standards, Zedtee is required to obtain consent from Rumah Jeffery to log their customary land. While a company representative did approach the community to seek an agreement, no agreement was put in writing nor was its scope and duration agreed to before activities got underway, according to the village chief and other residents interviewed by Human Rights Watch. Once the company began logging, it even cut down trees it had committed to preserving for the community, disregarding even those inadequate, limited terms, according to community members.

Furthermore, Zedtee should not have used the offer of services, such as re-paving the community’s access road, as a negotiating tool, given that MTCS standards require them to provide these. According to MTCS Principle 4 on “Community Relations,” forest managers should supply local infrastructure and facilities to communities within or adjacent to the FMU.[136] In any event, access to potable water and accessible roads are public services that the government should ensure.

Even though Zedtee’s actions have violated several criteria under the MTCS, the two most recent surveillance audits conducted by the auditing firm SIRIM did not reflect these transgressions. Human Rights Watch reviewed SIRM’s third and fourth surveillance audits of the Anap-Muput FMU, conducted in October 2022 and June 2023, respectively.[137] Neither audit found any weaknesses or nonconformities under Principle 2, “Tenure and Use Rights and Responsibilities,” and Principle 3, “Indigenous Peoples’ Rights.”[138] This was despite both audits being conducted after Rumah Jeffery’s territory was logged without free, prior and informed consent, as well as after the community was threatened with being forcibly evicted.

When SIRIM conducted its fourth surveillance audit, the community had already sent a formal letter to the Land and Survey Department requesting it be removed from the concession area. This request was not mentioned in the audit.[139] SIRIM instead observed that “no recorded civil court case pertaining to legal or customary tenure” was filed against the Forest Management Unit, giving the false impression of an absence of protests or complaints from Indigenous peoples.[140]

SIRIM’s failure to record the Rumah Jeffery community’s resistance to logging in their territory and resistance to being removed altogether speaks to concerns long raised by civil society groups over the failure of SIRIM, and the MTCS program, to expose and denounce violations of Indigenous people’s rights.[141]

Malaysian Federal Law

Malaysia’s federal constitution recognizes that Indigenous traditions should be given equal weight to other forms of law.[142] Article 160 of the constitution defines “law” as including not only codified and common law but also “custom or usage having the force of law” (adat).[143] Malaysian courts have further defined the significance of land to Indigenous peoples. The High Court of Sabah and Sarawak, in Nor Anak Nyawai & Ors v. Borneo Pulp Plantation & Ors, held that the deprivation of rights to land for an Indigenous Iban community amounted to depriving them of their right to life under article 5 of the constitution.[144]

However, under Malaysia’s federal form of government, individual states have jurisdiction over the administration of land and forests, including setting laws and policies on timber extraction and plantation development.[145]

Sarawak State Law

Sarawak’s laws generally do not uphold the internationally recognized rights of Indigenous peoples to own and control their land, participate in decision-making, or access important information that impacts their rights and livelihoods. Despite these severe limitations, Human Rights Watch found the Sarawak government did not even comply with its own laws and policies in the handling of Rumah Jeffery’s situation and Zedtee’s conduct.

The Sarawak Land Code establishes that native customary rights may be acquired by a community by “the felling of virgin jungle and the occupation of the land thereby cleared,” “the planting of land with fruit trees,” “the occupation or cultivation of land,” and “the use of land for a burial ground or shrine.”[146]

While the Code fails to recognize how communities also lay claim to land through customary forest management without felling it, Human Rights Watch considers that Rumah Jeffery nonetheless still meets the Code’s requirements.

The mapping work conducted by SADIA with Rumah Jeffery community members locates the cultivation land, fruit trees, burial ground and the community’s longhouse.[147] Furthermore, the survey of Sarawak that Human Rights Watch reproduced in this report shows that cultivation of land in Rumah Jeffery was already visible in 1951.[148]

Furthermore, section 15 of the Sarawak Land Code requires that any native customary land first be “terminated” or “surrendered,” and compensation paid to those who lost land, before anything can be done on the land.[149] Yet, as described in this report, the community has not agreed to surrender their land, nor have they been paid compensation for the losses they incurred for the unauthorized activities on their territory.

Lastly, while it is the Sarawak Forest Department’s policy to have all long term timber licenses, including tree plantations, certified by 2025, Zedtee continues to operate LPF 0039 despite being in breach of this requirement.[150] The MTCC CEO wrote to Human Rights Watch that LPF 0039 had not been certified under the MTCS, and the public database managed by FSC did not reflect any licenses being held by Zedtee.[151]

While Human Rights Watch brought this non-compliance to the attention of the Sarawak Forest Department in February 2025, the latter has not told Human Rights Watch how it will address it, or more generally how it will deal with concessions in breach of this requirement going forward.

Trade and Sustainability Regulations

European Union

The EU Deforestation Free Products Regulation (EUDR) prohibits placing seven specified commodities and their derived products on the EU market if they were grown on land that was deforested after December 2020. Covered commodities include wood products, such as wood pellets. Products must also have been produced in conditions that respect domestic laws on labor rights and land use, as well as the principle of free, prior, and informed consent as defined under the UNDRIP.[152]

Penalties for transgressors include fines up to 4 percent of the company's total annual EU-wide turnover; confiscation of non-compliant products; seizure of revenues derived from tainted products; and exclusion from procurement processes and access to public funding. Repeating offenders could also be temporarily banned from placing on the EU market commodities or products covered by the EUDR. 

As part of the implementation of the EUDR, the European Commission needs to benchmark every country or parts thereof as low, standard or high risk.[153] While the Commission has yet to publish the exact methodology for this assessment, the regulation states the primary criteria will be the rate of deforestation and the “rate of expansion of agriculture land for relevant commodities.”[154]

The Commission may also, but is not obligated to, consider the “existence, compliance with, or effective enforcement of laws protecting human rights, the rights of Indigenous peoples, local communities, and other customary tenure rights holders,” as well as “whether the country concerned makes relevant data available transparently.”[155] Human Rights Watch and other civil society organizations have urged the Commission to also consider these elements in their assessment.[156]

Human Rights Watch has called on the Commission to benchmark Sarawak as high risk in a briefing co-authored with two Indigenous organizations from Sarawak, a climate monitoring group based in Kuala Lumpur, and two international organizations.[157] The joint briefing considered all the criteria described in the paragraph above to conclude that, unless the federal and state governments undertake ambitious reforms, Sarawak is a high risk area for deforestation and Indigenous rights violations.

In December 2024, EU lawmakers decided to postpone the enforcement of the EUDR by one year for large companies and by 18 months for small and medium enterprises. The law will start being enforced on December 31, 2025. Prior to that, by June 2025, the commission must publish their risk benchmarking methodology and the list of countries, or parts thereof, and their risk classification.

Japan

Japan’s Act on Promotion of Use and Distribution of Legally-Harvested Wood and Wood Products (the Clean Wood Act), in force since 2017, recommends that companies conduct due diligence to ascertain the legality of timber products that they import and evaluate the risk of illegality.[158]

The objective of the Clean Wood Act is to “promote the use and distribution of wood and wood products made from trees harvested in compliance with the laws and regulations of Japan and the countries of origin.”[159]

Companies must report the timber they are placing on the market is legal. If the company does not check the legality, it can receive several warnings and a fine of up to ¥ 300,000 (approximately US$2,000).[160] While much narrower in scope and weak in its enforcement, the Clean Wood Act still provides a framework for companies to exercise care towards timber imports from Malaysia, and Sarawak in particular.

United States

The 2008 Amendment to the Lacey Act prohibits trading plants or plant products harvested in violation of US or foreign laws.[161] These include timber, wood, and paper products. Third-party certification schemes do not “prove” legality under the Act if the timber was illegally harvested – only actual legality ensures compliance. Importers are required to file an import declaration identifying the scientific name, value, quantity and country of origin of plant and plant products.

Transgressors of the Lacey Act may face civil and criminal penalties. These vary depending on the offenders’ level of knowledge about the illegal origin of products, meaning whether they failed to comply due to neglect or outright fraud. Those who traffic in products that were illegally harvested may face felony criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment. Those who failed to exercise “due care” to ascertain the legality of the product may face criminal or civil penalties.[162]

Recommendations

To the Sarawak Premier’s Office (Premier Sarawak)

• Progressively act to ensure that the Rumah Jeffery community and other similar rural communities have access to clean and safe water, roads, and other essential services.

• Support amending the Sarawak Land Code to align it with international human rights standards on Indigenous rights, particularly the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Specifically:

  • Remove the arbitrary 1,000 hectare cap on Indigenous land under section 6A;

  • Revise section 28 to require a government survey, with the participation of Indigenous residents, as well as titling of Indigenous territories, in any area before a lease can be granted;

  • Require that native customary rights may only be extinguished under section 5 with the free, prior, and informed consent of the Indigenous peoples concerned after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return;

  • Reverse the legal burden of proof from Indigenous peoples to the state and business for litigation related to the use and ownership of native ancestral lands, in line with the constitutional protections for native customary rights that shift the burden to parties intending to displace or harm Indigenous communities.

• Adopt a binding moratorium on the expansion of oil palm and timber plantations in the state of Sarawak, capping both at an area no larger than their current size.

To the Sarawak Land and Survey Department (Jabatan Tanah Dan Survei)

• Survey Rumah Jeffery’s territory and grant the community with formal title over land to which they have native customary rights.

• Declassify the aerial photographs taken in Sarawak during and prior to 1958 and make them publicly available (online and at government offices).

• Maintain a public database of Indigenous territories that have been surveyed, as well as pending applications.

To the Sarawak Forest Department (Jabatan Hutan Sarawak)

• Recognize and respect the customary land rights of Indigenous communities even where the land has not yet been gazetted as Native Communal Reserve or has not been approved by the Land and Survey Department.

• Develop a process to consult with and provide avenues for appeal for Indigenous communities accused by companies of encroachment on forest management units (FMUs).

• Require offices that administer and store environmental and social impact assessments to make these permanently and publicly available and downloadable in full.

• Maintain a public database of timber licenses the department has granted, including maps and, ideally, shapefiles of those concessions.

• Revoke long term timber licenses, including licenses for forest plantations, that have been unable to meet the requirements of the MTCS or FCS certifications by January 2025, in line with the Department’s own Forest Management Certification policy. 

To the Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia (Pejabat Perdana Menteri Malaysia)

• Promote the adoption of federal legislation that incorporates the provisions of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and is applicable to, and enforceable in, all Malaysian states.

• Promote the adoption of a federal freedom of information law enabling all citizens to gain access to environmental and other information of public interest across all states.

• Promote the adoption of legislation against Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (anti-SLAPP statutes) that protects Indigenous peoples, human rights groups, and others from malicious, frivolous, or vexatious lawsuits.

• Promote the adoption of a federal Government Procurement Act that both ensures environmental sustainability and the protection of human rights and labor rights, throughout the procurement process.

• Promote the adoption of federal legislation requiring lenders, investors and other financial institutions to conduct environmental and human rights due diligence for their operations, take steps to prevent, mitigate and address risks, and help ensure redress when they cause or contribute to human rights or labor violations or environmental destruction.

• Promote federal legislation to reverse the burden of proof from Indigenous peoples to the state and business in litigation related to the use and ownership of native ancestral lands.

• Promote the adoption of legislation to enforce the federal government’s pledge to keep 50 percent of the country under forest cover.

• Include pledge to keep at least 50 percent of Malaysia under forest cover in the country’s upcoming Nationally Determined Contribution due this year in line with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement, as well as paragraph 33 of the First Global Stocktake and the Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use.

To the Federal Ministry of Plantations and Commodities (Kementerian Perladangan dan Komoditi)

• Recognize that oil palm plantations and plantation forests are not equivalent to natural forests with respect to biodiversity, carbon storage, or availability of forest products for traditional communities.

• Cap the area of licenses for plantation forests (LPFs), in the same way the ministry established a cap for oil palm plantations for the whole territory of Malaysia.

  • Make this cap consistent with the federal government’s goal to keep 50 percent of land under forest cover.  

  • Develop adequate and effective mechanisms to enforce this cap, as well as the cap on oil palm plantations.

• Make MTCS, MC&I, SFM and chain of custody certification mandatory for all logging concessions and licenses for plantation forests as well as all sawmills, in the same way MSPO is already mandatory for all oil palm plantations and palm oil mills.

• Establish dissuasive federal penalties for companies incurring in nonconformities with MTCS and MSPO standards, including fines and prosecution.

To the Federal Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability (Kementerian Sumber Asli dan Kelestarian Alam)

• Commission a study on fallow and degraded forest lands across all of Malaysia’s federal territory, and develop a plan in conjunction with other ministries, state governments, Indigenous peoples, and other rural communities to restore degraded forests.

To the Malaysian Timber Certification Council

• Revise the MC&I SFM Indicator 2.2.1 for Criterion 2.2 to protect customary tenure rights even where communities do not hold title for their native customary land.

• Maintain a publicly accessible online database that makes available information about all the MC&I SFM and chain of custody certifications granted, their status, and makes publicly available environmental and social impact assessments and audits conducted for validation and verification.

• Establish a standardized threshold regarding the number and type of non-conformities that will trigger suspension or withdrawal of a certificate under the MTCS.

• Identify major non-conformities that result in immediate suspension of a certificate, which should at least include altering license boundaries, clearing outside of approved areas, logging in water catchments, inadequate or improper community consultations, and failure to obtain free, prior, and informed consent.

• Require SIRIM, Control Union and any other certification body authorized to conduct audits in relation to MTCC standard to publish their guidelines and policies.

• Establish an escrow fund managed by the MTCC and into which certified companies are required to pay into as part of certification fees, in order to compensate auditors.

• Ensure social audits are neither solely nor primarily reliant on information provided by the company under evaluation.

• Institute, publish, and widely disseminate among communities impacted by MTCC-certified concessions policies to ensure timely responses and actions when complaints are filed.

To Zedtee SDN BHD

• Withdraw the complaint to the Sarawak Forest Department seeking the eviction of the Rumah Jeffery community.

• Excise Rumah Jeffery’s territory, as mapped by the community, from the Anap-Muput FMU and the Anap Belawit Management Area LPF 0039.

• Excise all native customary land from the Anap-Muput FMU and the Anap Belawit Management Area LPF 0039.

• Provide services to the Rumah Jeffery community, as required by the MTCS standards to communities that live adjacent to logging concessions. These should include maintaining the access road and installing water pipes.

• Compensate Rumah Jeffery community members for logging in their territory.

To the European Union

• Ensure timely and robust implementation of the EU Regulation on Deforestation-Free Products (EUDR), including by adhering to the existing enforcement timetable and adopting an implementing act that guarantees a robust risk benchmarking system.

• Designate Sarawak a high-risk area under the EUDR risk benchmarking system unless and until Malaysia undertakes meaningful reform to preserve naturally regenerating forests, which are separate and distinct from tree plantations, and to incorporate UNDRIP into enforceable domestic law.

• Urge Malaysian authorities to establish an effective federal traceability mechanism for wood products, limit and reverse deforestation, and uphold Indigenous peoples’ rights during all bilateral trade, human right and environment-related talks, including at the highest levels, and offer financial support and knowledge transfers for these endeavors.

• Offer financial and technical support to enable the Sarawak Land and Survey Department to proactively survey Indigenous land.

• Offer financial and technical support directly to Indigenous groups to conserve and protect their ancestral territories.

To France’s Ministry of Environmental Transition and Territorial Cohesion (Ministère de la Transition écologique et de la cohésion des territoires)

• Instruct the General Commissariat on Sustainable Development (Commissariat général au développement durable), as the competent authority to enforce the EUDR, to inspect wood pellet and other wood products originating from Sarawak to assess compliance with the EUDR.  

To the Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Food Security and Nature (Ministerie van Landbouw, Visserij, Voedselzekerheid en Natuur)

• Instruct the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (Nederlandse Voedsel-en Warenautoriteit), as the competent authority to enforce the EUDR, to inspect wood pellet and other wood products originating from Sarawak to assess compliance with the EUDR.

To the US Fish and Wildlife Service

• Instruct the Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement for Lacey Act Amendments of 2008 to inspect wood products originating from Sarawak to assess compliance with the law’s requirements.

To the US Congress

• Adopt the Fostering Overseas Rule of law and Environmentally Sound Trade Act of or the FOREST Act.

To the Japanese Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (農林水産省, Nōrin-suisan-shō)

• Work with other relevant ministries to revise the Clean Wood Act and related ordinances and basic policies to ensure economic operators are required, and not only recommended, to conduct due diligence on the legality of wood products, provide guidelines on how this due diligence should assess and mitigate risk, require companies to ensure traceability to the point of origin where the timber was harvested, and increase penalties to be genuinely dissuasive.

• Increase scrutiny on imports of wood products from Sarawak.

Acknowledgments

Human Rights Watch is thankful to the community members of Rumah Jeffery who bravely shared their stories and who continue to organize to reclaim their customary rights to their land and their forest. Human Rights Watch is also grateful to the Sarawak Dayak Iban Association (SADIA), whose staff provided input to this report based on their longstanding expertise on native customary land rights and their work conducting community mapping of Indigenous territories. Human Rights Watch is furthermore grateful to SAVE Rivers and The Borneo Project for sharing their expertise on Malaysian certification systems, and to Junichi Mishiba at Friends of the Earth Japan for sharing his expertise on Japan’s Clean Wood Act.

This report was written by Luciana Téllez Chávez, senior environment and human rights researcher at Human Rights Watch, and Matthew Reysio-Cruz, assistant researcher and former Finberg fellow at Human Rights Watch. It is based on research conducted jointly by Téllez Chávez and Reysio-Cruz, with guidance from SADIA geospatial experts Matek Geram and Nicholas Mujah. Carolina Jordá Álvarez and Léo Martine, senior geospatial analysts at the Digital Investigations Lab of Human Rights Watch, conducted the geospatial analysis featured in this report.

The report was reviewed and edited by Richard Pearshouse, environment and human rights director; Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director; Jim Wormington, associate economic justice and rights director; Juliana Nnoko-Mewanu, senior women’s rights researcher; Sam Dubberley, technology, rights and investigations director; Claudio Francavilla, associate EU advocacy director; and Teppei Kasai, Asia officer, all at Human Rights Watch. Sari Bashi, former program director, and James Ross, legal and policy director, provided programmatic and legal review respectively.