Are Benzodiazepines legal in Malaysia?

Legal status

Controlled under both the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and the Poisons Act 1952, depending on the member. That split is the difference between a four year maximum and the death penalty. TWO of them are dangerous drugs: «Flunitrazepam» and «Nimetazepam» are both named in Part III of the First Schedule to the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, and the Poisons List marks each of them «(DD)». Every other benzodiazepine is caught only by the Poisons Act 1952, through the Poisons List formula «Diazepam and other substances structurally derived from 1, 4-benzodiazepine; their salts, unless specified elsewhere» and the matching Third Schedule entry. Etizolam, a thienodiazepine, is named separately in the Third Schedule. So a single answer for the family is wrong in both directions.

Consequences if caught

Section 39B(2) reaches two benzodiazepines and no others. «Flunitrazepam» and «Nimetazepam» are named in Part III of the First Schedule, so for those two the sentence on a trafficking conviction is death or imprisonment for life. For every other member of the family this cell asserts no capital exposure at all, because none of them is in that Schedule, and a class answer here would be wrong in both directions. The chain is short and it passes through no weight at any point. Section 2 defines a «dangerous drug» as «any drug or substance which is for the time being comprised in the First Schedule», section 39B(1) prohibits trafficking in «a dangerous drug», whether on your own behalf or on behalf of any other person, and section 39B(2) sets the penalty. And the word «trafficking» is itself defined in section 2, far wider than selling: it «includes the doing of any of the following acts, that is to say, manufacturing, importing, exporting, keeping, concealing, buying, selling, giving, receiving, storing, administering, transporting, carrying, sending, delivering, procuring, supplying or distributing any dangerous drug otherwise than under the authority of this Act or the regulations made under the Act». Keeping, carrying and storing are on that list, so nothing commercial has to be shown. Neither of the two carries a section 37(da) presumption weight. So there is no presumption to rebut and no threshold to stay under, and section 39B(2) applies in the same terms as it would to a weighed substance. The other presumption is still there. Section 37(d) provides that any person found to have had in his custody or under his control anything whatsoever containing a dangerous drug «shall, until the contrary is proved, be deemed to have been in possession of such drug and shall, until the contrary is proved, be deemed to have known the nature of such drug». The words «until the contrary is proved» put the defendant to proof on both limbs, on the possession and on the knowledge. Death is available and it is no longer mandatory, and the change has a date. Section 39B(2) once read simply «on conviction with death». The Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act 2017, Act A1558, in force 15 March 2018, opened a narrow gate out of that, a date carried forward from the earlier reading and not re-derived in this pass. The Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023, Act 846, came into operation on 4 July 2023, and section 54 of it is the whole of what it did to the Dangerous Drugs Act: it substituted «be punished with whipping of not less than twelve strokes» for fifteen strokes in subsection (2), and it deleted subsections (2A) and (2B), which were the mandatory death machinery. Section 39B(2) now reads, in full: «Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of subsection (1) shall be guilty of an offence against this Act and shall be punished on conviction with death or imprisonment for life and shall, if he is not sentenced to death, be punished with whipping of not less than twelve strokes.» So the court chooses between death and imprisonment for life with no precondition, and at least twelve strokes follow any sentence that is not death. Act 846 is widely described as replacing life with a term of thirty to forty years. It did that in the Penal Code, the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, the Arms Act 1960, the Kidnapping Act 1961, the Strategic Trade Act 2010 and the Criminal Procedure Code. It did not do it here: the words «imprisonment for life» in section 39B(2) are untouched and no definition of that phrase appears anywhere in the Dangerous Drugs Act, so no year figure is stated in this cell. Section 55 of Act 846 applies the amended section to anyone sentenced after it came into operation even where the offence was committed before. Below trafficking, the possession offence is section 12. Section 11(1) provides that «This Part applies to dangerous drugs listed in Parts III, IV and V of the First Schedule», which is what brings a Part III substance inside Part IV of the Act. Section 12(2) then prohibits having such a drug in your possession, custody or control «unless he is authorized to be in possession, custody or control of such drug or is deemed to be so authorized under this Act or the regulations made thereunder», and section 12(3) punishes a contravention with «a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both». Self-administration is section 15(1), at a fine not exceeding five thousand ringgit or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, and section 38B(1) then requires supervision for not less than two and not more than three years after the sentence has been served. Three procedural consequences follow automatically. Section 41(1) removes a section 39B charge from the Sessions Court and the Magistrates' Court, so it is tried in the High Court, and section 41A(3) has it tried by a judge sitting alone. Section 41B(1) provides that bail «shall not be granted» where the offence is punishable with death, and also where it is punishable with imprisonment for more than five years. Section 38A, which lets a court deal with a drug dependant under eighteen under the Drug Dependants (Treatment and Rehabilitation) Act 1983 rather than punish him, is expressly unavailable for a section 39B offence. Section 39C separately escalates a repeat offender under the consumption and possession provisions to not less than five and not more than seven years with not more than three strokes. Where the rest of the family sits is a Poisons Act question and the finding is carried forward from the earlier reading of that Act rather than re-derived here: the Poisons List catches them by the class formula anchored on diazepam, and etizolam, a thienodiazepine rather than a 1,4-benzodiazepine, is named separately. A prescription written abroad for one of the two named substances and a prescription written for any of the others are therefore not the same document in Malaysia, and the difference is the whole distance between a fine and section 39B. The list can move under all of this. Section 45A is headed «Power of the Minister to vary First Schedule» and it operates either on a decision of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs or of the United Nations Organization altering the Schedules to the Single Convention, or simply where the Minister «considers it expedient to add a substance to, or remove a substance from, or vary the First Schedule, he may by order make the requisite modifications». An order takes effect on gazetting and there is no notice period. He has used it twice since the text read here, by P.U. (A) 97 gazetted 2 April 2024 and P.U. (A) 416 gazetted 25 November 2025, both carried forward from the earlier reading and neither re-read in this pass. The text read for this cell is the Attorney General's Chambers updated text headed «As at 4 July 2023», and a later order is not ruled out.

If prescribed or medical

The prescription answer for the benzodiazepines is two answers, and a single one would be wrong whichever way it went. Two of them are dangerous drugs and the rest are not. «Flunitrazepam» and «Nimetazepam» are named in Part III of the First Schedule to the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. Every other benzodiazepine is reached only by the Poisons Act 1952, through the Third Schedule entry «Diazepam and other subtances structurally derivated from 1,4-benzodiazepine except flumazenil and pirenzepine» and the matching Poisons List entry «Diazepam and other substances structurally derived from 1, 4-benzodiazepine; their salts, unless specified elsewhere». Etizolam, a thienodiazepine rather than a 1,4-benzodiazepine, is named separately in the Third Schedule. For flunitrazepam and nimetazepam the Dangerous Drugs Act governs. Every prohibition in the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, and the definition of trafficking in section 2, is qualified by the words «otherwise than under the authority of this Act or the regulations made under the Act», so a lawful holding is one that sits inside an authority granted under the Act. A supply dispensed inside that authority is outside the offence. For every other benzodiazepine the Poisons Act governs. Section 30(3) prohibits possessing a psychotropic substance «otherwise than in accordance with any regulations applicable thereto made under this Act». Those regulations are the Poisons (Psychotropic Substances) Regulations 1989, and regulation 3 is the one a patient stands on: possession is prohibited unless «he is authorised to be in possession of such psychotropic substance under these Regulations» and the substance is for a lawful purpose and obtained under them. Regulation 3(2)(l) places a person lawfully supplied «in accordance with a prescription lawfully given by a registered medical practitioner, registered dentist Division I of a veterinary surgeon» inside that authority, the wording of that paragraph being the publisher's.

Documentation

Carry the prescription and the dispensing label with the medicine, in its original packaging, and know which benzodiazepine it is, because the answer differs between them. The entry decides it: «Flunitrazepam» and «Nimetazepam» in Part III of the First Schedule on one side, and «Diazepam and other subtances structurally derivated from 1,4-benzodiazepine except flumazenil and pirenzepine» in the Third Schedule on the other. For flunitrazepam and nimetazepam the Dangerous Drugs Act applies. Section 25 of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 is the only personal traveller provision the Act contains, and its reach is narrower than it looks. It sits in Part V, which is the external trade Part, and it opens by providing that nothing in that Part applies to a quantity of a dangerous drug in the form of a medicinal preparation in the «possession of any person arriving in Malaysia by land, air or water from any place outside Malaysia as is reasonably required for the use of such person and which has been supplied to such person bona fide by or on the prescription of a medical practitioner residing outside Malaysia in accordance with the law of the country in which such drug was so supplied». Because the words are nothing in this Part, it answers the import control and it does not touch the possession and trafficking provisions that sit in Part IV of the Act. It is also conditional: the person «shall, as soon as possible on arrival, declare his possession of such dangerous drug to an officer having authority under this Act to search such person and shall submit to such medical examination as may be required of him». Getting the paperwork wrong is not a paperwork penalty. Section 37(d) provides that «any person who is found to have had in his custody or under his control anything whatsoever containing any dangerous drug shall, until the contrary is proved, be deemed to have been in possession of such drug and shall, until the contrary is proved, be deemed to have known the nature of such drug», and section 37(da) can then presume trafficking from the weight of the material alone. For every other benzodiazepine the Poisons Act applies. Regulation 4(2)(a) of the Poisons (Psychotropic Substances) Regulations 1989 is the traveller provision and it fixes a figure the Dangerous Drugs Act never does: a person arriving in or leaving Malaysia who carries, as part of personal luggage and solely for personal or family use, a prepared or packaged medicine containing a psychotropic substance is outside the import authorisation requirement, provided the quantity is «not exceeding such quantities as may be reasonably required for one month's use by one person» and it has been lawfully supplied by or on the prescription of a qualified medical practitioner. Section 30(4) presumes possession and knowledge from custody or control: a person found with the substance «shall be deemed to have been in possession of the substance and to have known the nature of the substance, until he proves to the contrary». The prescription is what rebuts it. The penalty under section 30(5) is «a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding four years or both». A traveller who cannot name the molecule cannot tell which of those two paragraphs governs. The entry the document has to answer to, in the First Schedule itself, is «Nimetazepam» at Part III, «Flunitrazepam» at Part III. If the document does not answer the entry, the charge is section 12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, possession of a dangerous drug without authority, and section 12(3) sets «a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both». Section 12(4) adds whipping of not more than three strokes where the person convicted is a public officer employed at a prison, rehabilitation centre, police lock-up or place of detention.

Drug laws and enforcement change and vary within a country. This is not legal advice. Always confirm with Malaysia’s embassy or official drug authority before traveling; penalties can be severe, including imprisonment.