Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)

A Resource Guide for AWL Public Resources

1. The History of CEDAW

For much of the twentieth century, international human rights law addressed gender discrimination in fragments. Individual treaties touched on specific issues such as political participation, equal pay, and marriage rights, but no single instrument brought these concerns together into a coherent, legally binding framework.

Women's rights remained at the margins of the international human rights agenda.

That changed on 18 December 1979, when the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. CEDAW was the product of years of advocacy by women's movements across the world and by the UN Commission on the Status of Women, which had been pressing since the 1940s for a comprehensive international standard on gender equality.

CEDAW entered into force on 3 September 1981, after being ratified by the required twenty member states. It remains the most comprehensive international treaty dedicated to the rights of women.

The Road to CEDAW

The foundations were laid long before 1979. The UN Charter of 1945 affirmed the equal rights of men and women. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 declared that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. But these commitments were general, and their application to women's lives remained inconsistent and contested.

In 1946, the UN established the Commission on the Status of Women, which began documenting discrimination against women across political, civil, economic, social, and family life. Over the following decades, the Commission produced a series of targeted declarations and conventions. The 1952 Convention on the Political Rights of Women, the 1957 Convention on the Nationality of Married Women, and the 1962 Convention on Consent to Marriage each addressed a slice of the problem. But they were piecemeal, and many countries ratified them selectively or not at all.

By the 1970s, the international women's movement had grown in confidence and in coordination. The UN declared 1975 to 1985 the Decade for Women. The First World Conference on Women in Mexico City in 1975 adopted a World Plan of Action that called for a single, comprehensive convention. The drafting process began in earnest, and on 18 December 1979, CEDAW was adopted by 130 votes in favour, none against, and ten abstentions.

The Optional Protocol

In 1999, the Optional Protocol to CEDAW was adopted by the UN General Assembly and entered into force in December 2000. The Optional Protocol created two important mechanisms:

The Communications Procedure, which allows individual women or groups to bring complaints directly to the CEDAW Committee when their rights under the Convention have been violated, and
The Inquiry Procedure, which empowers the Committee to investigate situations of grave or systematic violations. As of 2024, 115 countries have ratified the Optional Protocol. Malaysia has not.

Key Milestones

1946: UN Commission on the Status of Women established.
1967: Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women adopted (non-binding).
1975: First World Conference on Women, Mexico City. UN Decade for Women declared.
1979: CEDAW adopted by the UN General Assembly on 18 December.
1981: CEDAW enters into force on 3 September after ratification by 20 states.
1995: Malaysia ratifies CEDAW, with reservations. Beijing Platform for Action adopted.
1999: Optional Protocol to CEDAW adopted.
1998: Malaysia withdraws reservations to six articles following the Beijing Conference.
2024: Malaysia reviewed by the CEDAW Committee at its 88th Session in Geneva. 189 states parties to CEDAW.

2. Why CEDAW Matters

CEDAW matters because discrimination against women is not an abstraction. It is the reason a woman cannot pass her nationality to her child. It is the reason a girl is married before she finishes school. It is the reason a woman is paid less than her male colleague, has fewer inheritance rights, and has less access to credit, land, and justice. CEDAW names these realities, defines them as violations of international law, and creates a framework of accountability for governments to address them.

CEDAW is often called the international bill of rights for women. It is the only international treaty that comprehensively addresses women's rights across political, civil, economic, social, cultural, and family life.

What Makes CEDAW Different

Unlike many human rights instruments that simply prohibit discrimination, CEDAW goes further. It recognises that formal equality is not enough. A law that treats women and men identically may still produce unequal outcomes if it ignores structural disadvantages.

CEDAW therefore requires substantive equality, meaning that governments must take active steps to address the conditions that produce inequality, not simply remove discriminatory rules.

CEDAW also introduces the concept of temporary special measures, essentially affirmative action, to accelerate progress toward de facto equality. This is the international legal basis for policies such as gender quotas in government, reserved parliamentary seats, and targeted scholarships for women in underrepresented fields.

Critically, CEDAW reaches into the private sphere.

Discrimination within the family, in marriage, and in the home falls within its scope. This is significant because many of the most entrenched forms of discrimination against women occur not in law but in custom, in private relationships, and in the home.

The Value of a Reporting Mechanism

One of CEDAW's most practical contributions is its monitoring system. States parties must submit periodic reports to the CEDAW Committee, a body of 23 independent experts, detailing what steps they have taken to implement the Convention. The Committee reviews these reports, asks questions, and issues Concluding Observations with specific recommendations. Civil society organisations, including AWL and its JAG partners, can submit parallel or shadow reports, giving independent voices direct access to the international accountability process.

This reporting cycle creates a regular, structured opportunity for governments to be held to account and for advocates to raise concerns on the international stage.

Malaysia was reviewed most recently at the 88th Session of the CEDAW Committee in May 2024.

What CEDAW Has Achieved

In countries that have ratified and implemented CEDAW in good faith, the impact has been significant. CEDAW has provided the legal foundation for domestic violence legislation, equal pay laws, maternity protection, women's land and property rights, and the criminalisation of marital rape. It has been used by advocates to challenge discriminatory laws in courts, to lobby for constitutional amendments, and to hold governments to commitments they might otherwise have quietly abandoned.

In Malaysia specifically, CEDAW has been invoked in advocacy that led to the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act 2022, the extension of maternity leave to 98 days, protections for pregnant employees, and the amendment of citizenship laws to recognise Malaysian mothers' right to confer nationality on their overseas-born children. The AWL and its JAG partners have been central to this advocacy.

3. Malaysia and CEDAW

Ratification and Reservations

Malaysia acceded to CEDAW on 5 July 1995, becoming one of the later ASEAN states to do so. The accession came with a significant caveat: Malaysia declared that its acceptance of the Convention was subject to the understanding that its provisions did not conflict with Islamic Shariah law and the Federal Constitution. On this basis, Malaysia entered reservations to eight articles of the Convention at the point of accession: Articles 5(a), 7(b), 9(2), 16(1)(a), 16(1)(c), 16(1)(f), 16(1)(g), and 16(2).

These reservations covered three broad areas:

Articles 5(a) and 7(b): Gender stereotypes and women's participation in public life.
Article 9(2): Women's equal right to pass their nationality to their children.
Articles 16(1)(a), (c), (f), (g), and 16(2): Equal rights in marriage and family life, including the right to enter marriage, equal rights during marriage and at its dissolution, equal rights regarding guardianship of children, and the minimum age of marriage.

Following the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action, Malaysia undertook a review of its reservations and in February 1998 withdrew six of them: Articles 2(f), 9(1), 16(b), 16(d), 16(e), and 16(h). This was a meaningful step, and one that advocates in the women's movement had pressed for. It signalled a willingness to engage with CEDAW's requirements in areas where the government determined that domestic law could be brought into alignment.

Four reservations were still active as of the 88th CEDAW Session in May 2024, covering women's equality in family life and their children's nationality rights. Their current status is as follows.

Article 9(2): Women's equal right to confer their nationality on their children. This reservation was long justified by Malaysia on the basis that the relevant domestic law had not been amended.

That position has now changed materially. In October 2024, Malaysia passed the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2024, which came into effect on 4 March 2025. The amendment ensures that Malaysian mothers with foreign spouses can automatically confer citizenship on their children born overseas, correcting a long-standing provision under Article 14(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution that had previously recognised only the word "father." This is a significant and welcome development. However, the amendment is not fully retroactive, meaning children born overseas to Malaysian mothers before 4 March 2025 may still face citizenship application hurdles.

Thousands of cases remain outstanding. Critically, Malaysia has not yet taken the separate and necessary step of formally notifying the UN of the withdrawal of its reservation to Article 9(2). Having amended the domestic law, as it said it would, Malaysia should now follow through and formally withdraw this reservation from the UN treaty register. That step remains overdue.

Article 16(1)(a) concerns women's equal right to enter into marriage. Malaysia's reservation on this article is linked to Shariah law provisions that permit Muslim girls to marry from the age of sixteen, with court approval permitting marriage below that age in exceptional circumstances. Child marriage therefore remains legally permissible in Malaysia, in direct conflict with both CEDAW and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Malaysia is also a party.

Article 16(1)(c) concerns equal rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its dissolution, including in relation to divorce, maintenance, and the division of property. Malaysia does not consider itself fully bound by this article to the extent it conflicts with Shariah law, which governs these matters for Muslim Malaysians.

Articles 16(1)(f) and 16(1)(g) concern equal rights regarding the guardianship and adoption of children, and equal personal rights including the right to choose a profession and occupation. Under Islamic family law, the father is generally recognised as the natural guardian of children, which can disadvantage mothers in guardianship proceedings.

The CEDAW Committee, across multiple review cycles, has consistently stated that Malaysia's remaining reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. Several UN member states including France, the Netherlands, Austria, Norway, and Germany have formally objected to these reservations on the same basis. At the 88th CEDAW Session in May 2024, Malaysia confirmed that the reservations remain in place and that a working committee has been established to assess and evaluate them. Advocates, including AWL and its JAG partners, continue to press for the formal withdrawal of all remaining reservations and for the full implementation of CEDAW's principles in Malaysian law and practice.

Progress Since 1995

Malaysia's engagement with CEDAW over the past three decades has not been without genuine progress. Advocates, including AWL and its JAG partners, have used the CEDAW reporting cycle and its Concluding Observations as a lever for domestic law reform. Key achievements that have been attributed in part to CEDAW advocacy include:

The amendment to the Federal Constitution in 2001 to include gender as a prohibited ground of discrimination under Article 8(2).
The Anti-Sexual Harassment Act 2022 (Act 840), which for the first time created a specific legal framework to address sexual harassment in Malaysia.
The establishment of the Tribunal for Anti-Sexual Harassment in March 2024.
The extension of maternity leave from 60 to 98 days under the amended Employment Act 1955.
The introduction of seven days of paid paternity leave.
The criminalisation of stalking in 2023.
The Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2024, passed in October 2024 and in effect from 4 March 2025, which grants Malaysian mothers with foreign spouses the automatic right to confer citizenship on their children born overseas. This corrects a longstanding gender discriminatory provision and is a landmark outcome of sustained advocacy by the citizenship rights movement. The amendment is not fully retroactive, and advocates continue to press for resolution of outstanding cases predating March 2025.

The 88th CEDAW Session, May 2024

Malaysia was reviewed by the CEDAW Committee at its 88th Session in Geneva in May 2024, presenting its sixth periodic report. The delegation was led by Minister of Women, Family and Community Development Nancy Shukri, a high-level presence that the Committee noted with appreciation.

The Committee commended Malaysia's progress in establishing legal and institutional frameworks, including the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act, the stalking offence, and the maternity leave extension. However, it pressed Malaysia on a number of outstanding concerns, including the remaining reservations to Articles 9(2) and 16, the status of the Optional Protocol, the absence of a standalone gender equality bill, the persistence of child marriage, and the ongoing issue of statelessness among children of Malaysian women married to foreign nationals.

Malaysia confirmed at the session that it still maintains reservations on Articles 9(2) and 16(1)(a), (c), (f), and (g), and that a working committee has been established to assess and evaluate these reservations. Malaysia has not yet ratified the Optional Protocol.

4. The Key Advocacy Points

1. Withdraw the remaining reservations

The most direct and unambiguous demand is for Malaysia to withdraw its remaining reservations to CEDAW. The CEDAW Committee has consistently stated that Malaysia's reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention. Several countries, including France, the Netherlands, Austria, Norway, and Germany, have formally objected to Malaysia's reservations on this basis.

The argument that Shariah law is incompatible with CEDAW's requirements is not universally accepted, even within Islamic legal scholarship. Indonesia's ratification without substantive reservations demonstrates that a Muslim-majority country can commit fully to CEDAW. The reservations reflect political choices, not legal inevitabilities.

2. Ratify the Optional Protocol

Malaysia has not ratified the Optional Protocol to CEDAW, meaning that Malaysian women cannot bring individual complaints to the CEDAW Committee when their rights have been violated and domestic remedies have been exhausted. Ratifying the Optional Protocol would significantly strengthen the accountability framework and send a clear signal of commitment to CEDAW's implementation.

3. Enact a comprehensive Gender Equality Act

CEDAW is not directly incorporated into Malaysian domestic law. This means that it cannot be relied upon directly in Malaysian courts. The CEDAW Committee has consistently recommended that Malaysia enact a standalone gender equality bill that gives domestic legal effect to CEDAW's principles. Malaysia acknowledged in 2024 that discussions on this bill began in 2020. Advocates continue to push for this legislation to be a priority.

4. End child marriage

Malaysia's reservation to Article 16(1)(a) is directly linked to the persistence of child marriage in Malaysia, which remains legally permissible under Islamic family law with court approval. AWL and its JAG partners have long campaigned for a minimum age of marriage of 18 with no exceptions for all Malaysians, regardless of religion. This is a concrete, achievable law reform that would also represent progress toward withdrawing the reservation to Article 16.

5. Address statelessness and citizenship equality

Malaysia's reservation to Article 9(2) on nationality rights has contributed to the statelessness of children born to Malaysian women married to foreign men. While the 2024 constitutional amendment was a significant step, implementation has been slow and thousands of applications remain outstanding. Advocates continue to push for full and equal citizenship rights for the children of Malaysian women, the withdrawal of the Article 9(2) reservation, and accession to the Convention on Stateless Persons.

6. Harmonise Shariah and civil law with CEDAW principles

Many of the most significant barriers to CEDAW compliance arise at the intersection of Islamic family law and civil law. Advocates argue that genuine engagement with Islamic legal scholarship, alongside political will, can produce reforms that honour both the commitments made under CEDAW and the principles of Islamic justice. The CEDAW Committee has recommended that Malaysia undertake systematic efforts to harmonise Shariah law with the Convention, including through education, judicial training, and legal reform.

5. Conclusion

CEDAW was not written for an ideal world. It was written for this one, a world in which discrimination against women is embedded in laws, in customs, in institutions, and in the quiet assumptions of everyday life. Its power lies not in its perfection but in its persistence: a legally binding commitment, backed by a monitoring system, that keeps governments accountable across decades.

Malaysia's relationship with CEDAW is a story of genuine progress set against unfinished business. The last three decades have produced real legislative gains, and the women's movement in Malaysia, including AWL and the organisations it works alongside, has been central to those gains. The Anti-Sexual Harassment Act, the citizenship amendment, the maternity leave extension, the criminalisation of stalking: none of these happened without sustained advocacy, and CEDAW has been part of the toolkit at every step.

But progress is not completion. Malaysia's remaining reservations to Articles 9(2) and 16 are not technical formalities. They represent active limits on the rights of Malaysian women in some of the most intimate and consequential areas of their lives: their marriages, their families, their children, their nationality. The argument that these reservations are required by religious law does not withstand scrutiny. Indonesia has shown that a Muslim-majority country can ratify CEDAW in full. The CEDAW Committee, multiple UN member states, and Malaysia's own civil society organisations have made clear that the reservations are incompatible with the Convention's purpose.

The question is not whether Malaysia can withdraw its remaining reservations. The question is whether there is sufficient political will to do so.

For AWL, CEDAW is not a distant international instrument. It is the framework that underpins the organisation's advocacy on citizenship rights, child marriage, sexual harassment, gender equality in the legal profession, and women's representation in public life. Every campaign AWL has been part of, every law reform it has supported, every watching brief it has held, has been shaped by the principles that CEDAW embodies.

Understanding CEDAW, its history, its structure, what it demands, and where Malaysia stands in relation to it, is therefore not just a matter of academic interest. It is a matter of knowing the ground on which the fight for women's equality in Malaysia is being fought, and understanding the international standards to which Malaysia has committed itself, however imperfectly, to uphold.

The work continues. And AWL, as it has always been, is part of it.

Association of Women Lawyers (AWL) | awlmsia@gmail.com | April 2026