INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5571
www.rsisinternational.org
Education without Citizenship and its Importance to Literacy: A
Comparative Analysis of Stateless Children’s Rights in Malaysia and
Indonesia
Musaiyadah Ahmadun
*1
, Muhammad Izwan Ikhsan
2
, Dg Syahirah Nasuha Nurshid
3
and Siti Sarah
Izham
4
1,2
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Sabah Brunch, Malaysia
3,4
Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia
*
Coressponding Author
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000456
Received: 20 October 2025; Accepted: 26 October 2025; Published: 15 November 2025
ABSTRACT
The right to education is universally recognized as a fundamental human right under international frameworks
such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Yet, for stateless children in Southeast Asia, this
right remains precarious. This study examines how Malaysia and Indonesia interpret and implement the
educational rights of stateless children, highlighting the gap between international obligations and domestic
practices. Guided by an interpretivist paradigm, the research employed qualitative content analysis of
approximately legal documents, policy frameworks, NGO reports, and scholarly articles. Findings reveal five
recurring themes: rights acknowledged in principle but restricted in practice; documentation as the primary
barrier to school access; the central role of NGOs and community-based schools as de facto providers;
experiences of discrimination within formal and informal education; and divergent national approaches shaped
by centralized versus decentralized governance. The study advances theoretical debates by conceptualizing
statelessness as a distinct axis of social exclusion, demonstrating how legal identity intersects with human
rights and non-discrimination principles. Practically, the research underscores the need for inclusive education
policies, recognition of NGO-led initiatives, and regional cooperation through ASEAN. By offering a
comparative perspective, this article provides original insights for scholars, policymakers, and practitioners
concerned with education and child rights.
Keywords: stateless children, right to education, Malaysia, Indonesia, human rights, social exclusion, non-
discrimination
INTRODUCTION
Statelessness, often described as the condition of being without nationality, is a persistent global phenomenon
with far-reaching consequences on human rights, particularly for children (Goris, Harrington & Köhn, 2009;
Siegelberg, 2020). Across regions, children without nationality are among the most vulnerable groups, facing
structural exclusion from education, healthcare, and legal protection (Batchelor, 1998; Blitz & Lynch, 2011).
In Southeast Asia, the plight of stateless children has become especially pressing in recent years due to
increased cross-border migration, displacement, and complex nationality laws (Razali et al, 2015; Nurmawati,
2022). Among the fundamental rights at stake, access to education stands out as both a legal entitlement and a
moral imperative. Education is not merely a pathway for personal development but also a key instrument for
social integration, empowerment, and the breaking of intergenerational cycles of poverty and marginalization
(Kamaruddin, Ahmad & Sulaiman, 2005; Arshad, Ajis & Mutalib, 2022). Yet, for stateless children in
Malaysia and Indonesia, education remains an elusive promise.
Global frameworks such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) 1989 and the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 1948 emphasize education as a universal right that applies to every
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5572
www.rsisinternational.org
child, regardless of nationality (Stephanie, 2020; Failin et al., 2022). Despite these international obligations,
the reality on the ground reflects systemic exclusions. Malaysia, while a signatory to the CRC, has not ratified
the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol, leaving asylum seekers and stateless groups without
comprehensive protection (Dina, 2014; Rodziana et al., 2015). Indonesia, similarly, has not ratified the 1951
Convention, though it has domesticated CRC principles through its child protection laws (Ni Luh et al., 2023;
Jaelani, 2023). Consequently, both nations struggle to reconcile their international commitments with domestic
legal structures, leading to inconsistencies in the recognition and protection of the right to education for
stateless children. This tension is further complicated by bureaucratic restrictions, lack of documentation, and
socio-economic challenges that undermine inclusive educational policies (SUHAKAM, 2024; Ko & Cooray,
2024).
Scholarly engagement with the issue of statelessness in education has increased in the past two decades,
reflecting growing concerns over inequality and exclusion in the Global South. In Malaysia, studies have
highlighted how children from marginalized groups, particularly the Bajau Laut, Rohingya refugees, and
undocumented migrants ace systemic barriers to enrolling in government schools (Nadzirah & Khalim, 2019;
Abadi & Al-Kautsar, 2021; Tharani et al., 2023). Many rely on alternative education centers supported by non-
governmental organizations (NGOs) and international agencies such as UNICEF and UNHCR, yet these
institutions often lack formal recognition and sustainable funding (Muyamin, 2019; Arshad, Ajis & Mutalib,
2022). In Indonesia, research shows a similar pattern, where refugee and undocumented children are granted
limited access to state schools through temporary policy mechanisms, but remain excluded from certification
processes and long-term educational pathways (Pudjiastuti & Putera, 2022; Prabaningtyas et al., 2023). Local
initiatives such as the Refugee Learning Centre in Cisarua illustrate grassroots resilience but also expose the
fragility of education provision when dependent on external aid (Renatha Ayu, 2022). Collectively, these
studies underline the paradox of rights recognized in principle but denied in practice.
Despite the breadth of existing research, significant gaps remain in understanding the comparative dynamics of
Malaysia and Indonesia. Much of the scholarship on Malaysia has focused on legal interpretations of
constitutional rights, the role of NGOs, and specific case studies of refugee children (Razali, Nordin &
Duraisingam, 2015; Ko & Cooray, 2024; Arshad, Ajis & Mutalib, 2022). Meanwhile, Indonesian studies often
emphasize administrative measures, presidential decrees, and the interplay between humanitarian
commitments and resource limitations (Nugroho et al., 2021; Ni Luh et al., 2023). Few works have
systematically compared both contexts, even though the two countries share historical, cultural, and political
linkages, as well as common challenges in dealing with undocumented populations. This absence of
comparative analysis leaves critical questions unanswered: How do Malaysia and Indonesia differ in
implementing children’s right to education? What structural similarities underpin their barriers? And how
might insights from one context inform reforms in the other? Addressing these questions is vital for moving
beyond fragmented accounts toward a more integrated understanding of stateless children’s educational rights
in Southeast Asia.
The research problem at the heart of this study is the tension between international commitments and domestic
realities in guaranteeing the right to education for stateless children. On one hand, Malaysia and Indonesia
publicly affirm the universality of children’s rights through their ratification of the CRC; on the other, their
education systems remain largely inaccessible to non-citizens without documentation (Mazura & Nor Hafizah,
2018; SUHAKAM, 2024). This inconsistency has severe implications: it entrenches social exclusion, denies
children the opportunity to develop their potential, and risks reproducing cycles of marginalization within
already vulnerable communities (Rahman et al., 2018; Simbolon, 2025). At a practical level, children left
outside the education system are more likely to face child labour, early marriage, and social stigmatization,
compounding existing inequities. From an academic perspective, insufficient attention has been given to how
these legal and policy contradictions shape the lived realities of children across different national contexts.
This study thus seeks to fill the gap by offering a comparative, qualitative analysis of Malaysia and Indonesia,
grounded in a human rights framework.
Furthermore, the current body of literature lacks sustained attention to the principle of non-discrimination as it
relates to education for stateless children. While some scholars have discussed exclusion broadly (Hamidah,
2021; Sarita & Komal, 2023), there is limited empirical exploration of how policies either reinforce or mitigate
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5573
www.rsisinternational.org
discriminatory practices in Southeast Asian contexts. Similarly, while NGOs and community learning centres
are frequently acknowledged, there is insufficient critical engagement with their sustainability, legitimacy, and
long-term role within national education systems (Arshad, Ajis & Mutalib, 2022; Thien, 2024). These gaps
hinder both theoretical advancement and policy innovation. Without comparative evidence, policymakers lack
concrete models for reform, and scholars risk reproducing siloed accounts of statelessness in education that
overlook regional interdependencies.
Against this backdrop, this study makes three key contributions. First, it offers a comparative analysis of
Malaysia and Indonesia, addressing the current lack of cross-national scholarship on the right to education for
stateless children in Southeast Asia. Second, it integrates a qualitative content analysis of legal, policy, and
institutional documents with critical human rights theory, thereby advancing an interdisciplinary approach that
bridges law, education, and social policy. Third, it foregrounds the voices of stateless children indirectly
through the examination of NGO and UN reports, highlighting the lived consequences of policy exclusions.
Collectively, these contributions are significant not only for academic debates but also for practical
policymaking, as both countries grapple with balancing sovereignty concerns with human rights commitments.
In conclusion, this article argues that the denial of education to stateless children in Malaysia and Indonesia
reflects broader structural contradictions between international human rights law and domestic legal-political
frameworks. By systematically analyzing these dynamics, the study contributes new knowledge to the fields of
comparative education, human rights, and Southeast Asian studies. For academics, it enriches theoretical
debates on non-discrimination and the right to education; for practitioners, it offers concrete insights into
policy design, NGO engagement, and cross-border cooperation. The intended audience includes scholars of
education and law, policymakers, NGO practitioners, and international organizations concerned with child
rights and migration. Situated within contemporary debates on inclusivity and human rights, this study
underscores the urgency of reimagining education systems that leave no child behind, regardless of nationality
or legal status.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Human Rights and the Right to Education
Human rights are widely recognized as inherent entitlements belonging to every individual without distinction
of race, nationality, or status (Ashri, 2018). Rooted in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) 1948, these rights embody principles of equality, non-discrimination, and dignity. Within Southeast
Asia, states including Malaysia and Indonesia reaffirmed these commitments through the ASEAN Declaration
of Human Rights (ADHR), emphasizing equal treatment and the right to freedom of opinion, expression, and
education (Rohaida & Abdul Rahman, 2017; Mohamed Sadik, 2023). In Malaysia, constitutional protections
under Articles 5–13 codify fundamental liberties such as equality (Art. 8) and the right to education (Art. 12)
(Mohamed Azam & Nisar, 2014; Muhammad Shazreen, 2023). Parallel provisions exist in Indonesia through
the Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 and Undang-Undang No. 39 Tahun 1999, which enshrine the right to
education and link it to broader social and cultural development (Murthada & Seri Mughni, 2022; Hadi, 2022).
Education has long been conceptualized as both a basic human right and a cornerstone of development.
The Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4) explicitly places education at the center of global development,
framing it as essential for equity, inclusion, and peace. Scholars argue that education fulfills dual functions:
providing individual empowerment and acting as a mechanism of social cohesion (Rohaida Nordin, 2014).
Yet, despite the legal and normative frameworks, the universality of the right to education remains contested in
practice, especially when filtered through the lens of nationality and legal identity (Rostam et al., 2022;
SUHAKAM, 2024).
Rights of the Child
The specific rights of children have been elaborated most comprehensively under the Convention on the Rights
of the Child (CRC) 1989, ratified by both Malaysia and Indonesia. The CRC provides a legally binding
framework affirming children’s entitlement to education, protection, and participation (Pathmanathan et al.,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5574
www.rsisinternational.org
2011; Failin et al., 2022). The CRC not only extends the universality of human rights to children but also
emphasizes non-discrimination and the best interests of the child as guiding principles (Aminuddin & Siti,
2012).
Nationally, Malaysia defines a child under the Child Act 2001 as an individual below 18 years, aligning with
CRC standards. In Indonesia, Undang-Undang No. 35 Tahun 2014 revises earlier child protection laws to
reaffirm every child’s right to survival, growth, development, and protection regardless of status (Jaelani,
2023). Yet, scholars observe that although legal frameworks exist, implementation is uneven and often limited
by bureaucratic and political constraints (Mustaffa & Moharani, 2012; Nalasamy et al., 2011). For children
without nationality, these protections are weakened by their ambiguous legal status, leaving them outside the
reach of many formal protections (Nurhakim, 2022).
Statelessness: Definitions and Categories
Statelessness has been defined in Article 1 of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless
Persons as the condition in which an individual is “not considered as a national by any State under the
operation of its law” (Michelle & Helene,2016). Scholars distinguish between de jure statelessness (absence of
legal nationality under national law) and de facto statelessness (where individuals formally possess nationality
but lack effective protection from their state) (Carol, 1998; Tucker, 2013; Lewkowicz & Metelska-Szaniawska,
2021). The consequences of both forms are profound, often resulting in exclusion from essential services
including healthcare, employment, and education (Brad & Maureen, 2011).
In Malaysia, the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas (DHRRA) identifies seven major
categories of stateless persons: pre-independence residents, gender-discriminatory nationality laws, abandoned
children, adopted children without documentation, the Bajau Laut, Orang Asli, and undocumented
migrants/refugees (DHRRA, 2022). Indonesia presents a different but parallel spectrum of statelessness,
including Chinese and Arab descendants without documentation, repatriated political exiles, undocumented
migrant workers, and displaced minority groups (Nurmawati, 2022; Maskur et al., 2024). Both contexts reveal
statelessness as not merely a legal anomaly, but a socially entrenched phenomenon tied to colonial legacies,
bureaucratic shortcomings, and contemporary migration dynamics.
Education and Stateless Children
Access to education for stateless children is severely restricted in both Malaysia and Indonesia. In Malaysia,
public education is formally guaranteed under the Education Act 1996, which mandates compulsory primary
schooling. However, its application explicitly references “parents who are citizens,” thereby excluding children
without nationality (Kamaruddin et al, 2005; SUHAKAM, 2024). Studies demonstrate how this exclusion
manifests in Sabah, where large populations of undocumented and stateless children particularly the Bajau
Laut are unable to enroll in government schools (Nadzirah & Khalim, 2019; Abadi & Al-Kautsar, 2021). Many
depend on informal community-based schools such as those organized by Borneo Komrad or Humana, yet
these face funding shortages, unqualified teaching staff, and limited facilities (Muyamin, 2019; Arshad et.al,
2022).
Indonesia’s framework similarly ties formal education rights to citizenship. The Education Law No. 20 of
2003 guarantees education for citizens, leaving stateless and refugee children in a precarious position
(Nugroho et al., 2021). Attempts at inclusion, such as the Presidential Regulation No. 125 of 2016 and
the Ministerial Circular No. 7523/2019, provide temporary avenues for access but remain constrained by
conditions such as proof of UNHCR registration and assurances of non-reliance on state budgets (Ni Luh et al.,
2023). While local governments in Makassar and Batam have piloted inclusive models, these remain
exceptions rather than norms (Rizka et al., 2023). Grassroots initiatives such as the Cisarua Refugee Learning
Centre highlight resilience but reveal systemic dependence on external funding (Renatha Ayu, 2022).
The Principle of Non-Discrimination in Education
Central to both CRC and UDHR is the principle of non-discrimination, which affirms that access to education
must not be limited by nationality, gender, or social status (United Nations, 1989). In Malaysia, despite
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5575
www.rsisinternational.org
commitments under the CRC, implementation remains selective, particularly with the introduction of the “Zero
Reject Policy” in 2019, which prioritized children with disabilities but limited stateless children’s access to
those with potential citizenship claims (Ensimau et al, 2022). Critics argue that this policy reproduces
exclusion rather than addressing it (Ko & Cooray, 2024).
In Indonesia, Undang-Undang No. 39 Tahun 1999 on Human Rights defines discrimination as any direct or
indirect restriction based on religion, race, ethnicity, or status. Yet, discriminatory barriers remain in practice,
from school registration requirements to exclusion from national examinations (Mohammad Bilutfikal, 2024;
Nugroho et al., 2021). Scholars highlight that without structural reform, the promise of non-discrimination
remains aspirational rather than realized (Tara et al., 2023; Romalina et al., 2024).
Intersectional Social
Moreover, stateless status is not the only factor that limits access to education. Intersecting social identities
including gender, socioeconomic class, ethnicity, and geographic context further intensify the educational
inequalities faced by stateless children. As a result, Intersectional dynamics shape the lived experiences of
stateless children in both Malaysia and Indonesia.
In Malaysia, Rohingya girls confront dual layers of exclusion legal stateless status compounded by patriarchal
gender norms limiting mobility and school attendance (Ferdousi et al., 2022). Also, the problem is that they
don't have any legal status, and without legal status, they don't have the right to education, because they don't
have identification documents like an identity card, they are unable to take exams in national schools. The
country's examination system requires these documents as a requirement for participation (Shima et al., 2025).
Meanwhile, stateless Bajau Laut children in Sabah face exclusion driven by intergenerational poverty,
linguistic marginalization, and persistent ethnic stigma (Wan Shawaluddin & Diana, 2020; UNICEF Malaysia,
2020). Similarly, in Indonesia, refugee children in Java encounter uncertainty and rejection at the point of
enrollment due to ambiguous policy implementation (Ni Luh et al., 2023; UNHCR Indonesia, 2020). Girls
from sea-nomad communities in Sulawesi are further disadvantaged, as gendered economic expectations often
force early involvement in domestic and informal labour (Nurdin et al., 2021; Abdullah, 2020).
Stateless learners in Malaysia and Indonesia often face severe financial constraints that hinder their ability to
pay school fees (Tharani et al., 2023; Nadzarina et al., 2023; Alysa et al., 2023) Their lack of legal status
excludes them from government financial support or educational subsidies, making the cost of schooling
unaffordable for families who typically survive on irregular and low-income informal work.
Furthermore, Stateless children often face two major layers of barriers when attempting to attend school. First
social stigma, they are frequently perceived as “belonging to no nation” or as “illegal immigrants,” which leads
to discrimination from the community and peers (Norhafiza et al., 2022; Liza & Zainal, 2022; Falah et
al.,2023). This reduces their sense of social acceptance and negatively affects their learning motivation.
Second language barriers, many stateless children such as those from the Bajau Laut community in Sabah,
Rohingya refugees in Peninsular Malaysia and Stateless in Indonesia speak local dialects or their own ethnic
languages (Zen & Manique, 2024; Rina et al., 2023). Their limited proficiency in Bahasa Melayu or Bahasa
Indonesia hinders their integration into the formal education system.
METHODOLOGY
This study employed a qualitative research design informed by interpretivist and constructivist paradigms
(Fodoup, 2024). Interpretivism assumes that social reality is not singular or objective but rather multiple, fluid,
and context-dependent, shaped by the meanings individuals and institutions attach to their lived experiences
(Acharya, 2025). Constructivism complements this position by emphasizing that knowledge is co-constructed
through human interaction, historical processes, and institutional discourses rather than existing independently
of them (Saif & Laszlo, 2020). This philosophical stance was particularly appropriate given the focus of the
present study on the right to education of stateless children in Malaysia and Indonesia. The experiences of
statelessness and educational exclusion are not uniform; they are mediated by legal frameworks, political
practices, and socio-cultural norms. A qualitative approach therefore allowed for a more nuanced
understanding of how these rights are recognized, contested, and enacted within specific national contexts.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5576
www.rsisinternational.org
The methodological orientation of this study was document analysis, a form of qualitative inquiry that
systematically examines legal texts, policy frameworks, reports, and academic works to derive meaning and
insight (Morgan, 2022; Nicole, 2021). Document analysis was chosen for two reasons. First, it enabled access
to authoritative sources, such as constitutions, education acts, ministerial directives, and presidential
regulations, which form the legal foundation of children’s rights in Malaysia and Indonesia. Second, it
facilitated engagement with interpretive accounts produced by scholars, non-governmental organizations
(NGOs), and international agencies such as UNICEF, UNHCR, and SUHAKAM, all of which have
documented the conditions of stateless children and their struggles in accessing education. This combination of
legal documents and critical reports made it possible to triangulate official positions with independent
perspectives, thereby enhancing the credibility of the analysis.
Purposive sampling was used to select the documents included in this study. In keeping with the principles of
qualitative inquiry, purposive sampling allows the researcher to focus on information-rich sources that directly
address the phenomenon of interest (Omid et al., 2024). The corpus of documents comprised four broad
categories: legal frameworks and policies enacted by Malaysia and Indonesia, international instruments such as
the CRC and UDHR, reports and guidelines produced by NGOs and international bodies, and peer-reviewed
academic articles published in the last two decades. Together, these documents provided a comprehensive
dataset that reflected governmental, international, and civil society perspectives on the right to education of
stateless children. Data collection proceeded systematically. Documents were identified through targeted
searches of government gazettes, United Nations treaty databases, NGO portals, and academic databases such
as Google scholar and Scopus. Relevance was established by examining abstracts, preambles, or executive
summaries, and eligible materials were archived in a citation management system. Each document was
categorized by type and country focus, enabling organized comparison across Malaysian and Indonesian
contexts. The systematic collection of documents ensured breadth and depth, while the use of multiple types of
sources supported triangulation.
The analysis of the collected materials followed a qualitative content analysis approach as outlined by Philipp
Mayring (2000). This method was selected because it allows researchers to move beyond surface description to
uncover deeper patterns, meanings, and assumptions embedded in texts. The analysis was conducted in four
interconnected stages. First, the data were prepared by organizing documents into thematic clusters, such as
Malaysian policies, Indonesian regulations, or NGO reports. Second, coding was carried out, with passages
labelled for their relevance to key themes such as access to education, legal barriers, discrimination, or the role
of NGOs. Coding combined both deductive and inductive strategies: deductive codes were derived from
international human rights principles such as non-discrimination, while inductive codes emerged organically
from the data. Third, the codes were categorized into broader themes, for instance, “bureaucratic restrictions,”
“policy contradictions,” and “alternative education provision.” Finally, these themes were interpreted
comparatively to identify both convergences and divergences in how Malaysia and Indonesia approach the
education of stateless children. This hybrid strategy allowed the analysis to remain grounded in international
frameworks while remaining attentive to local contextual realities.
RESULT & DISCUSSION
The analysis of legal documents, policy frameworks, NGO reports, and scholarly sources revealed five central
themes that illuminate how the right to education for stateless children is constructed, contested, and
implemented in Malaysia and Indonesia. These themes expose the tension between rights affirmed in
international law and exclusions embedded within national systems, highlighting both shared regional
challenges and country-specific dynamics.
Legal and Policy Frameworks: Rights in Principle vs. Rights in Practice
Both Malaysia and Indonesia formally recognize the right to education within their legal frameworks, yet their
application remains circumscribed by nationality requirements. In Malaysia, Article 12(1) of the Federal
Constitution guarantees education for citizens “without distinction of religion, race, descent, or place of birth.”
However, as one analysis observed, “this provision applies only to citizens, excluding refugees and stateless
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5577
www.rsisinternational.org
children from compulsory schooling” (Mazura & Nurhafizah, 2018). Similarly, the Education Act
1996 mandates compulsory primary education but explicitly limits this obligation to parents who are
Malaysian citizens, thereby creating a structural exclusion (SUHAKAM, 2024).
Indonesia’s Education Law No. 20 of 2003 mirrors this limitation, stipulating that “every citizen has the right
to obtain quality education.” While inclusive in language, its operationalization privileges citizens, leaving
non-nationals to rely on ad hoc administrative policies such as the Presidential Regulation No. 125 of 2016 on
refugees. Even the 2019 Ministerial Circular permitting refugee children to access schools was hedged with
conditions, such as UNHCR registration and assurances that no financial burden would fall on the state
(Nugroho et al., 2021). These legal frameworks highlight what one UNHCR policy brief described as “the
paradox of recognition without implementation,” where rights are acknowledged rhetorically but denied
substantively through bureaucratic constraints (SUHAKAM, 2024). The divergence between principle and
practice emerges as a defining feature of both national contexts.
Bureaucratic and Documentation Barriers
The most pervasive obstacle identified across both contexts was the centrality of documentation in accessing
education. Stateless children often lack birth certificates, identity cards, or passports documents that serve as
gateways to school enrollment. In Malaysia, cases such as (register-General of Births and Deaths) v Pang Wee
See & Anor (2017) illustrate how even children adopted by Malaysian citizens were denied nationality due to
technicalities, leaving them ineligible for state education (Selvakumaran et al., 2020). The requirement
introduced under the “Zero Reject Policy” in 2019 that children present valid passports further entrenched
exclusion, as “adopted children without recognized birth parents cannot obtain passports, leaving them
permanently outside the education system” (Ko & Cooray, 2024).
In Indonesia, bureaucratic barriers manifest in school registration processes requiring family cards (kartu
keluarga) and national identity numbers. Refugee children, even with UNHCR cards, frequently face rejection
at the point of enrollment, as “local officials remain uncertain whether to interpret the 2019 Circular as
binding” (Prabaningtyas et al., 2023). While some districts, such as Makassar, innovated by partnering with the
International Organization for Migration (IOM) to fund refugee education, such practices remain uneven and
contingent on local political will (Antje, 2017). These bureaucratic hurdles illustrate what scholars term “legal
invisibility” (Razali et al., 2015), where children’s identities are erased in administrative processes. The
consequence is systemic exclusion: without documents, children remain legally unrecognized and thus
educationally excluded.
Alternative Education and NGO Initiatives
In the absence of formal recognition, NGOs and community-based organizations have emerged as central
actors in providing educational opportunities. In Malaysia, UNHCR collaborates with over 130 community
learning centers, such as the Grace Alternative Learning Centre in Tawau, which in 2024 became the only
NGO school officially recognized by the Ministry of Education (Thien, 2024). Similarly, organizations like
Borneo Komrad operate informal schools for Bajau Laut children in Semporna, providing basic literacy despite
limited resources (Abadi & Al-Kautsar, 2021). Humana Child Aid Society also partners with Indonesian
consulates to deliver education in plantation areas, particularly for Indonesian migrant children (Muyamin,
2019).
Indonesia presents comparable patterns. The Cisarua Refugee Learning Centre, established by refugees
themselves, has become a model for alternative education, inspiring at least ten similar initiatives nationwide
(Renatha Ayu, 2022). While these schools provide essential access, they face precarious funding, lack
accreditation, and limited curricular recognition. As one policy paper noted, “certificates issued by such
centers cannot be used for formal progression, leaving refugee children in a cycle of temporary schooling
without long-term opportunity” (Pudjiastuti & Putera, 2022). These initiatives reflect resilience and grassroots
commitment but also reveal structural dependence on external aid. The pattern is one of partial inclusion
education is provided, but without formal recognition, its transformative potential is constrained.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5578
www.rsisinternational.org
Experiences of Exclusion and Discrimination
Beyond legal and bureaucratic barriers, stateless children frequently encounter social discrimination and
stigmatization. In Malaysia, studies of Rohingya students highlight language barriers and social isolation.
Teachers reported that “students often lacked confidence to speak in Malay or English, leading to silence in
classrooms and withdrawal from peers” (Aida & Napisah, 2021). Such linguistic exclusion compounded
structural barriers, with children internalizing feelings of inferiority. Gender norms further intersect with
statelessness. Research shows that Rohingya girls in Malaysia are disproportionately denied schooling, as
cultural norms prioritize domestic responsibilities or early marriage (Tharani et al., 2023). Similar patterns
exist in Indonesia, where female refugee children often face “double exclusion” due to both gender and
stateless status (Ni Luh et al., 2023).
Discrimination also manifests in subtle forms of administrative neglect. Reports from SUHAKAM (2024)
document instances where children were technically admitted to schools but marginalized within classrooms,
denied textbooks, or excluded from examinations. These practices, though less visible than outright denial,
nonetheless undermine the principle of equality enshrined in the CRC. The recurring theme is that stateless
children’s exclusion is not only structural but experiential, embedded in the everyday practices of schools and
communities. As one Indonesian refugee parent remarked in a UNHCR field report: “My child wears the same
uniform, but she is never really part of the class” (UNHCR, cited in Nugroho et al., 2021).
Comparative Insights: Convergences and Divergences
The comparative analysis reveals important similarities and differences between Malaysia and Indonesia. Both
countries share a common paradox: they have ratified the CRC and committed to SDG4, yet their national
education systems remain citizenship-based, effectively excluding stateless children. In both contexts,
documentation functions as the primary barrier, and NGOs emerge as the de facto providers of education.
Discrimination, whether bureaucratic or social, perpetuates cycles of exclusion that international frameworks
seek to prevent.
However, divergences are also notable. Malaysia’s education policies, such as the Zero Reject Policy, reveal a
more formalized but restrictive approach, where inclusion is conditional on potential citizenship claims.
Indonesia, by contrast, has adopted temporary administrative solutions such as the 2019 Circular that allow
broader, albeit precarious, access. Local governments in Indonesia demonstrate greater autonomy, leading to
innovative partnerships, whereas Malaysia’s highly centralized education system leaves little room for such
flexibility.
These findings suggest that while both states grapple with the same structural dilemma balancing sovereignty
with human rights Indonesia’s decentralized governance has created pockets of innovation, while Malaysia’s
centralized approach results in uniform but rigid exclusion. For children, however, the outcome remains
similar: partial access, fragile inclusion, and uncertain futures.
DISCUSSION
The findings of this study provide a nuanced understanding of how the right to education for stateless children
is simultaneously affirmed and undermined in Malaysia and Indonesia. While both countries have ratified
the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and espoused the principle of inclusive education, their legal
and policy frameworks remain tethered to citizenship-based criteria. This section discusses these findings in
relation to existing scholarship and theory, identifies theoretical contributions, explores practical implications,
and outlines limitations and directions for future research.
The first major finding is the paradox between rights recognized in principle and denied in practice. In both
Malaysia and Indonesia, education is constitutionally and legally protected but circumscribed by nationality
requirements. This echoes the observations of Rostam et al. (2022), who argued that the legal framing of
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5579
www.rsisinternational.org
education in Malaysia inherently excludes non-citizens despite international commitments. The reliance on
citizenship as a condition of access positions stateless children as outsiders, even when they are born and
raised within the country. In Indonesia, similar tensions emerge, as the Education Law No. 20 of
2003 promises education to “every citizen,” but leaves refugee and undocumented children dependent on
temporary circulars or local government discretion (Nugroho et al., 2021). These findings confirm the
argument of Batchelor (1998) and Blitz & Lynch (2011) that statelessness produces structural exclusion,
whereby rights guaranteed under international law are curtailed by domestic sovereignty concerns.
A second key finding is the centrality of documentation as a barrier to access. Stateless children, lacking birth
certificates, identity cards, or passports, are unable to fulfill bureaucratic requirements for school enrollment.
In Malaysia, this is compounded by restrictive interpretations of constitutional provisions, as seen in judicial
decisions such as Pang Wee See (2017), where legal technicalities trumped the child’s best interests. In
Indonesia, the requirement for family cards or national identification similarly excludes refugee children, even
those registered with UNHCR. This resonates with Razali et al., (2015), who conceptualize such practices as
“legal invisibility,” whereby individuals are erased from the administrative record and thereby denied rights.
Theoretically, this reflects social exclusion theory, which emphasizes how institutional mechanisms
systematically marginalize groups and reproduce inequality (Rahman et al., 2018).
Third, the findings highlight the role of NGOs and community-based schools as de facto providers of
education. In Malaysia, initiatives like Grace Alternative Learning Centre and Borneo Komrad illustrate how
civil society fills gaps left by the state (Abadi & Al-Kautsar, 2021; Thien, 2024). In Indonesia, refugee-led
centers such as the Cisarua Refugee Learning Centre similarly demonstrate resilience in the face of state
inaction (Renatha Ayu, 2022). However, these initiatives are often precarious, lacking accreditation and
resources, which limits their sustainability and transformative potential. This reflects Arshad, Ajis & Mutalib’s
(2022) critique that NGOs provide essential humanitarian protection but cannot substitute for systemic reform.
The presence of such alternatives highlights both the creativity of marginalized communities and the
abdication of responsibility by states.
Finally, the analysis shows that exclusion is not merely structural but experiential. Stateless children encounter
discrimination in classrooms, language barriers, and gender-based exclusion. For example, Rohingya girls in
Malaysia are disproportionately denied access due to cultural norms (Tharani et al., 2023), while refugee
children in Indonesia often feel marginalized even when technically admitted to schools (Rizka et al., 2023).
These experiences confirm the concerns of Nicken Sarwo (2018) and Yanto (2023) that principles of non-
discrimination remain aspirational unless supported by concrete structural reforms. The findings thus reveal a
continuum of exclusion: legal restrictions, bureaucratic hurdles, and everyday discrimination combine to deny
stateless children equal access to education.
Theoretical Contributions
This study makes several theoretical contributions. First, it advances understanding of the paradox of
recognition without implementation. By systematically comparing Malaysia and Indonesia, the study
demonstrates how international human rights frameworks such as the CRC coexist with national laws that
effectively negate them. This tension enriches human rights theory by showing how sovereignty functions as a
structural barrier to universality in education.
Second, the study extends the application of social exclusion theory to statelessness. While exclusion is often
conceptualized in terms of class, ethnicity, or disability, this research illustrates how legal identity itself
functions as an axis of exclusion. Statelessness operates not only as a lack of nationality but also as a generator
of systemic marginalization across bureaucratic, educational, and social domains.
Third, the study contributes to the principle of non-discrimination in education by demonstrating its uneven
application in Southeast Asia. By analyzing how policies like Malaysia’s Zero Reject Policy or Indonesia’s
2019 Circular simultaneously extend and restrict access, the research highlights the limitations of rights-based
frameworks when mediated by state discretion. This nuance contributes to conceptual debates on the difference
between formal equality and substantive equality in education.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5580
www.rsisinternational.org
Practical and Policy Implications
The findings carry significant implications for policymakers, educators, and civil society. At the national level,
governments must recognize that denying education to stateless children undermines social cohesion and long-
term development. Malaysia and Indonesia could revise their education acts to adopt inclusive language
aligned with CRC obligations, ensuring that all children, regardless of nationality, have access to primary
education. Ministries of education should also establish pathways for the accreditation of NGO and community
schools, thus legitimizing existing efforts and providing children with recognized qualifications.
For educators and school administrators, there is a need to foster inclusive pedagogies that address linguistic
and cultural barriers. Teacher training should include sensitization to the specific needs of stateless and refugee
children, promoting classrooms as spaces of integration rather than exclusion. Community engagement is also
crucial. As the experiences of Rohingya girls illustrate, cultural norms can impede schooling; collaboration
with parents and religious leaders is necessary to shift attitudes toward girls’ education.
Civil society organizations, while constrained, should continue to play a bridging role between international
agencies and local communities. Partnerships between NGOs, consulates, and government agencies—as seen
in Humana’s collaboration with the Indonesian consulate in Sabah—provide useful models of shared
responsibility. Regional bodies like ASEAN could also adopt a stronger coordinating role by developing
guidelines on the education of stateless children, thereby encouraging harmonization across member states.
CONCLUSION
This study has examined the right to education for stateless children in Malaysia and Indonesia, revealing
systemic contradictions between international commitments and domestic practices. The findings demonstrate
that while both countries recognize education as a universal right, bureaucratic, legal, and social barriers
continue to exclude stateless children. NGOs and community schools provide vital alternatives but lack
sustainability and formal recognition, leaving children in precarious educational pathways.
Theoretically, the study contributes to debates on human rights, social exclusion, and non-discrimination by
demonstrating how legal identity operates as a structural axis of inequality. Practically, it calls for reforms to
national education laws, greater recognition of alternative education providers, and inclusive pedagogical
strategies. Despite methodological limitations, the research offers important insights for academics,
policymakers, and practitioners. Ultimately, the study underscores the urgency of reimagining education
systems that leave no child behind. Statelessness should not equate to educational invisibility. Ensuring access
to education for every child is not only a legal obligation but also a moral imperative and a prerequisite for
building inclusive, cohesive, and resilient societies in Southeast Asia and beyond.
Future research should prioritize participatory and child-centered methodologies that capture the lived
experiences of stateless children directly. In-depth interviews, ethnographic studies, and participatory action
research could provide richer insights into how children navigate exclusion and how education impacts their
aspirations. Comparative studies across Southeast Asia would also be valuable, examining how different
political regimes and cultural contexts shape statelessness. Theoretically, future work could further interrogate
the intersection of legal identity, social exclusion, and human rights, exploring how these concepts can be
operationalized to produce more inclusive policy frameworks. Finally, longitudinal research on the outcomes
of children educated in alternative schools would shed light on the long-term implications of non-recognized
education for employment, mobility, and integration.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was supported by the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi) to
the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (Grant No. FRGS/1/2023/SSI07/UITM/02/7). Sincere appreciation is
also conveyed to Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Sabah Branch and UiTM Shah Alam Branch for the
facilities and support that have greatly facilitated this study. Special thanks are also due to all individuals and
parties involved for giving academics the opportunity to produce and share the outcomes of their research.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5581
www.rsisinternational.org
REFERENCE
1. Abadi, M.A. & Al-Kautsar, K.S. (2021). Students who wait for union: Stateless Students of Borneo
Komrad alternative school perception toward social cohesion aspect in Sampoerna, Sabah.
2. Alysa, Angga Reynad HermawanPutra, Aggraeni Puspitasari, Ariela Naomi Syifa, Atika Yuanita
Paraswaty, Daniel Awigra, Jesse Adam Halim, Monica Susanti Rahadish, Rizka Argodianti Rachmah,
Telly Nathalia & Zico Efraindio Pestalozzi (2023), Baseline Research: Mapping the Situation of Person
at Risk of Statlessness in Indonesia, Human Right Working Group (HRWG); Jakarta.
3. Conference: Seminar kebangsaan Pendidikan Negara 2021 " Meneroka & Mengurus Isu-isu Kritikal
Pendidikan Negara", Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
4. Acharya, R. (2025). Examining Interpretivism in Social Science Research: Exploring Subjectivity,
Context, and Meaning in Social Inquiry. Education Science & Technology.
5. Aida Zahirah Samsudin & Napisah Karimah Ismail (2021), Pendidikan Kanak-Kanak Rohingya:
Kajian Kes di Rohingya Intellectual Skills and Excellence (RISE), Kajang, Selangor, Sains Insani 6 (3),
67-76.
6. Antje Missbaah (2017), Accomodating Asylum Seekers and Refugees in Indonesia: From Immigration
Detention to Containment in Alternatives to Detention, Refugee 33, 32-43.
7. Arshad, M.R.M., Ajis, M.N. & Mutalib, R.A. (2022). Human Rights Protection by Non-Governmental
Organisations (NGOs) for Stateless Rohingya in Malaysia. e-Academia Journal of UiTM Cawangan
Terengganu 11 (1) 31-41.
8. Batchelor, C. A. (1998). Statelessness and the problem of resolving nationality status. International
Journal of Refugee Law, 10(1-2), 156-182.
9. Broad K.Biltz & Maureen Lynch (2011), Statelessness and Citizenship: A Comparative Study on the
Benefits of Nationality, Edward Elgar Publishing: United Kingdom.
10. DHHRA, (2022). https://dhrramalaysia.org.my/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/STATELESSNESS-IN-
MALAYSIA-REPORT-05042022_compressed.pdf
11. Dina Imam Supaat (2014). Refugee Children Under The Malaysian Legal Framework. UUM Journal of
Legal Studies, 5, 111–141.
12. Ensimau, N.K., Hamzah, M.I. & Yassin, M.H.M. (2022). Zero Reject Policy: A New Pathway of
Inclusive Education in Malaysia. In book: Proceedings of the 3rd Progress in Social Science,
Humanities and Education Research Symposium (PSSHERS 2021), 1-14.
13. Falah al-Ghazali, Aulia Ramdhani Adila & Tegar Wahyudi (2023), The Protection of Stateless Children
Under the Instruments of International Law, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 259-281.
14. Failin, F., Yuserlina, A., & Ibrahim, E. (2022). Protection Of Children's Rights And Women's Rights As
Part Of Human Rights In Indonesia Through Ratification Of International Regulations. JCH (Jurnal
Cendekia Hukum), 7(2), 312-328.
15. Ferdousi Auter, Nobaya Ahmad, Nik Ahmad Sufian Burhan & Zumilah Zainaludin (2022), Gender
Inequalities in Reproductive Rights Among Rohingya Women: A Matter of Health, Education and
Income, Malaysian Journal of Human Ecology 3, 24-37.
16. Fodoup Konam Arthur William (2024), Interpretivision or Constructivism: Navigating research
Pradigms in Social Science Research, International Journal of Research 143 (1), 1-6.
17. Goris, I., Harrington, J., & Köhn, S. (2009). Statelessness: What it is and why it matters. Forced
migration review, (32), 4.
18. Hadi, F. (2022). Negara Hukum Dan Hak Asasi Manusia Di Indonesia. Wijaya Putra Law Review, 1(2),
170-188.
19. Hamidah, A. (2021). Urgensi prinsip non-diskriminasi dalam regulasi untuk pengarus-utamaan
kesetaraan gender. Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, 51(3), 677-697.
20. Jaelani, E. (2023). Tinjauan Yuridis Terkait Child Protection Convention 1996 dan Perbandingannya
dengan Undang-Undang No. 35 Tahun 2014 Tentang Perlindungan Anak di Indonesia. Public Sphere:
Jurnal Sosial Politik, Pemerintahan dan Hukum, 2(2).
21. Kamaruddin, Z., Ahmad, I.S. & Sulaiman, S. (2005). Education for all and children’s right to education
in Malaysia. Educational Awakening, Journal of the Educational Sciences, 2(2), 169-190.
22. Ko, Z.Y. & Cooray, M.A. (2024). Legal and social issues of stateless children in Malaysia. Asian
Journal of Law and Policy, 4(1), 77-98.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5582
www.rsisinternational.org
23. Lewkowicz, J., & Metelska-Szaniawska, K. (2021). De jure and de facto institutions: implications for
law and economics. Ekonomista, 6, 753-776.
24. Liza Shahnaz and Zainal Abidin Muhya (2022), The Right of Children on the Move in Indonesia:
Implementation and Challenges, JUUM 30, 99-110.
25. Mansuri Adi Abadi & Kerin Salma al-Kauthar (2021), Murid yang menunggu Penyatuan: Persepsi
Murid tanpa Negara dari Sekolah Alternatif Borneo Komrad terhadap Aspek Kohesi Sosial di
Semporna, Sabah, Seminar Kebangsaan Pendidikan Negara, 1-18.
26. Maskur, A., Shabir, M., Hapsin, A., Rismana, D., & Purwanto, J. (2024). Optimizing Legal Protection:
Addressing the Disparity of Sanctions Regarding Personal Names in Birth Certificates as Population
Documents. Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukurn dan Konstitusi, 7(1),1-17
27. Mazura Ms Samad and Norhafizah Mohd Badrol Affandi (2018), Hamouring Primary Education for
Stateless Children: Analysis of Malaysian Legal Perspective and Current Practice, International Journal
for Studies on Children,Women, Elderly and Disable 3 (January), 33-38.
28. Michelle Foster & Helene Lanbert (2016), Statelessness as Human Right Issue: A Concept Where Time
has Come, International Journal of Refugee Law 28 (4), 564-584.
29. Mohamed Adil, Mohamed Azam, and Nisar Mohammad Ahmad. 2014. “Islamic Law and Human
Rights in Malaysia”. ICR Journal 5 (1):43-67.
30. Mohammad Bilutfizal Khafi (2024), Review of Non-Discrimination Law in Education in Indonesia:
Analysis Based on the Convention the Right of the Child, RECHTSYINDING 2 (2), 59-66.
31. Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a Qualitative Document Analysis. The Qualitativ e Report , 27 (1), 64-
77.
32. Murthada, M., & Sulubara, S. M. (2022). Implementasi Hak Asasi Manusia di Indonesia berdasarkan
Undang-Undang Dasar 1945. Dewantara: Jurnal Pendidikan Sosial Humaniora, 1(4), 111-121.
33. Mustaffa, A., & Moharani, S. N. A. (2012). Isu dan permasalahan keterangan kanak-kanak di bawah
undang-undang di malaysia: satu penilaian. Kanun: Jurnal Undang-undang Malaysia, 24(1), 52-76.
34. Muyamin, M. (2019). Peran Aktif NGO Humana dalam Memfasilitasi Pendidikan Anak-Anak Tenaga
Kerja Indonesia (TKI) di Sabah Malaysia. Indonesian Perspective, 4(2), 100-117.
35. Nadzirah Miskiman & Khalim Zainal (2019), Cabaran dn Limitasi Pendidikan Untuk Kanak-Kanak
Tanpa Warganegara Di Pulau Mabul, Semporna, Sabah, Proceeding International Conference on
Business, Education, Innovation & Social Sciences,382- 391.
36. Nadzarina Hani Rostam, Nur Husaina Ahmad, Nur Shahira Aliah Mohammad Murshid, Rania Nabiha
Mohd Attas, Nur Ezan Rahmat & Atifah Othman (2022), A legal Analysis of Stateless Children and
Their Rights to Education in Malaysia: A Comparative Study with Thailand, International Journal of
Academic Research in Progressive Wducation & Development 11 (3), 1711-1726.
37. Nalasamy, P. R., Ah, S. H. A. B., & Zakaria, A. H. (2011). Pandangan Klien Perkhidmatan Mengenai
Implementasi Hak Kanak-Kanak Di Dalam Institusi Pemeliharaan Dan Perlindungan Awam. Sarjana,
26(2), 51-72.
38. Ni luh Gede Astariyani, I Nyoman Prabu Buana Rumiartha, Ni Ketut Ardani & Thomas John Keneven
(2023), Policy on the right to Education of Refugees in Indonesia and Australia, Lex Scientia Law
Review 7 (1), 249-276.
39. Nicole Sanfoke (2021), Critical Method of Document Analysis, International Journal of Social
Research Methodology 26 (6), 745-757.
40. Norhafiza Mohd Aed, Aprika Oskar & Nurazlan Hadi Yaacob (2022), Isu Stateless di Semporna
Sabah: Kesan Ke atas Pendidikan Kanak-Kanak tanp Negara (Bajau laut), Jorunal of Social Science
(EJOSS) 8 (21), 32-43.
41. Nugroho Adhi, Putu Agung, Bernadette Gitareja (2021), Challenge and Opportunity to Impelment the
Right to Education for Child Refugees in Indonesia, Advances in Social Science, Education and
Humanities Research (549), 54-62.
42. Nurhakim, H. Q. A. (2022). Hak asasi anak perspektif Islam. Kartika: Jurnal Studi Keislaman, 2(1), 66-
80.
43. Nurmawati, M. (2022). Stateless Person In Indonesia: Consequences and Legal Protection. Jurnal
Magister Hukum Udayana, 11(1), 76-88.
44. Omid Tajik, Jawad Golzar & Shagofah Noor (2024), Purposive Sampling, International Journal of
Education and Language Study 2 (2), 1-9.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5583
www.rsisinternational.org
45. Philipp Mayring (2000), Qualitative Content Analysis, FORUM: Qualitative Social Research 1 (2), 1-
10.
46. Prabaningtyas, R. A. R. F., Pudjiastuti, T. N., Alami, A. N., Farhana, F., & Arfan (2023). Access to
Education for Refugee Children in Indonesia During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Challenges and
Adaptation Strategies. ASEAS - Advances in Southeast Asian Studies, 16(1), 39-61.
https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-0089
47. Pudjiastuti, T. N., & Putera, G. G. (2022). Strategi Penguatan Pemenuhan Hak Pendidikan Bagi
Pengungsi Anak Luar Negeri di Indonesia. Policy Paper. Research Centre for Politics, National
Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN) Indonesia.
48. R.A.Rizka Fiani Prabaningtyas, Tri Nuke Pudjiastuti, Athiqah Nur Alami, Faudzan Farhana & Arfan
(2023), Access to Education for Refugee Children in Indonesia During the Covid -19 Pandemic:
Challenges ans Adaptation Strategies, Advances in Southeast Asian Studies, 16(1), 39-61.
49. Rahman, M. N. A., Siraj, S., Idris, N. F. M., Mansor, M. A., & Muhamad, N. A. (2018). Potensi
Pembangunan Modul Kurikulum Berasaskan Kemahiran Komuniti Setempat Bagi Kanak-Kanak
Bukan Warganegara Malaysia Tanpa Dokumen Pengenalan Diri: Tinjauan Awal. JuKu: Jurnal
Kurikulum & Pengajaran Asia Pasifik, 6(3), 15-21.
50. Razali, R. M., Nordin, R., & Duraisingam, T. J. (2015). Migration and statelessness: Turning the
spotlight on Malaysia. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 23(S), 19–36.
51. Renatha Ayu Rossdiana (2022), Masa Depan di Perbatasan: Pendekatan Humanitarian Pendidikan
Pengungsi Anak di Indonesia, Jurnal Hubungan Internasional 1, 53-73.
52. Rina Shahrullah, Heru Susetyo, Lu Sudirman & Rendi Shahputra (2023), Efektivitas Plaksanaan
Pemberian Pendidikan Formal bagi Anak-Anak Pengungsi Luar Negeri di Kota Batam, Jurnal Hukum
& Pembangunan 53 (1), 167-204.
53. Rodziana Mohamed Razdi, Rohaida Nordin and Tamara Joan Duraisingam (2015), Migration and
Statelessness: Turning the Spotlight on Malaysia, Pertanika J.Soc. Sic 23, 19-36.
54. Romalina Ronaivo Milea Manitra & Adya Paramita Prabandari (2024), Indonesian Constitutional
Guarantees, Against Discriminatory Treatment: An Empirical Study, Diponegoro Law Review 9 (2),
332-352.
55. Rostam, N. H., Ahmad, N. H., Murshid, N. S. A. M., Attas, R. N. M., Rahmat, N. E., & Othman, A.
(2022). A Legal Analysis of Stateless Children and Their Rights to Education in Malaysia: A
Comparative Study with Thailand. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive
Education and Development, 11(3), 1711–1726.
56. Saif Husam Mohammed & Laszlo Kinyo (2020), The Role of Constructivism in the Enhancement of
Social Studies Education, Journal of Critical Review 7 (7), 249-256.
57. Sarita, & Malik, K. (2023). Educational discrimination. International Journal of Scientific Research and
Engineering Development, 6(1), 78–81. https://ijsred.com/volume6/issue1/IJSRED-V6I1P9.pdf
58. Selvakumaran, K., Tie, F. H., & Yusoff, J. Z. M. (1970, January 1). A legal perspective on the right to
education for stateless children in selected ASEAN countries. UM Research Repository. Retrieved
September 21, 2021, from http://eprints.um.edu.my/id/eprint/24987.
59. Simbolon, M. A. M. (2025). Educational Barriers for Children? A Study of Fulfillment to the Rights of
Education for Undocumented Indonesian Children in Malaysia. Politika Progresif: Jurnal Hukum,
Politik dan Humaniora, 2(1), 310-321.
60. Shima Shazana Mohd Ali, Yarina Ahmad, Nor Suzinora Tahir, Nor Azira Ayob, Nur Amalina Aziz, Siti
Zulaikha Mustapha (2025), Education for Rohingya Refugee Children in Maalysia: A Pathway to
Sustainable Development Goals, Journal of Lifestyrl & SDG Review, 5, 1-23.
61. Stephanie (2020), The Refuges Status of Persons with Disabilities, Leiden: Boston.
62. Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia. (2024). Education for all: realizing the right to education for
refugee and stateless children in Malaysia. https://suhakam.org.my/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Policy-
Brief-RTD-on-Education-for-Refugee-and-Stateless-Children_Final.pdf
63. Tara Nadya Andiani, Hastowo Broto Laksito & Jose Gama Santos (2023), Evidence from Indonesia on
the Legal Policy Confronting Discrimination of Minority Groups Beased on Race and Ethnicity,
Wacana Hukum 29 (2), 146-162.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025
Page 5584
www.rsisinternational.org
64. Tharani Logaanathan, Zhen Ling Ong, Fikri Hassan, Zhie X.Chan & Hazreen Abdul Majid (2023),
Barries and Facilitators to Education Access for Marginalised non-Citizen Children in MalaysiaL a
Qualitative Study, Plos One 18 (6), 1-24.
65. Thien, D. (2024, November 24). Only school for stateless kids approved by govt. Daily Express.
https://www.dailyexpress.com.my/news/246754/only-school-for-stateless-kids-approved-by-
govt/#:~:text=Kota%20Kinabalu%3A%20Grace%20Alternative%20Learning,donations%20and%20sp
onsorship%20of%20students
66. Tucker, J. (2013). Questioning De Facto Statelessness by Looking at De Facto Citizenship. Tilburg Law
Review, Forthcoming.
67. United Nation (1989). https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-
rights-child
68. Wan Shawaluddin Wan Hassan & Diana Peters (2020), The Vulnerability of Bajau Laut as Stateless
People in Sabah, Journal Kinabalu 26 (2), 183-196.
69. Zen Yie Ko & Manique A E Cooray (2024), Legal and Social Issues of Stateless Children in Malaysia,
Asian Journal of Law and Policy 4 (1), 78-98.
