Is Nimetazepam legal in Malaysia?

Legal status

Nimetazepam is named in Part III of the First Schedule to the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, so it is a dangerous drug and not merely a psychotropic. The Poisons List confirms it, carrying «Nimetazepam» with the «(DD)» marker. It is one of only two benzodiazepines in that Schedule; the other is Flunitrazepam. Every other benzodiazepine is caught only by the Poisons Act class formula for substances structurally derived from 1,4-benzodiazepine. Erimin is the trade name most often used for it in the region and has no separate entry.

Consequences if caught

Capital and life exposure. Nimetazepam is in the First Schedule, so section 39B reaches it and the death penalty is available. The chain is short and it does not pass through any weight: section 2 defines «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», and section 39B(2) sets the penalty. And «trafficking» is defined in section 2 and it is 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. This substance has NO section 37(da) presumption weight, and that is the thing most readers get backwards. Section 37(da) runs to twenty seven subparagraphs and names twenty three substances in all: nine opiate, cocaine, cannabis and opium entries at (i) to (x), fourteen amphetamine-type substances at (xi) to (xxiv), and four combination clauses. It does one thing: it presumes trafficking «until the contrary is proved» once a person is found in possession of at least the stated weight. It does NOT create the capital offence and it is not a threshold below which section 39B stops applying. Section 39B(1) prohibits trafficking in «a dangerous drug», full stop. So the absence of a weight means the prosecution has to prove trafficking rather than presume it from the quantity alone, and nothing more than that. Death is no longer mandatory and the change has two dates. 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 it. The Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023, Act 846, in force 4 July 2023, then took the gate away by deleting subsections (2A) and (2B), because the discretion no longer needed a gate. 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 whipping of at least twelve strokes follows any sentence that is not death. The twelve is itself new: Act 846 substituted it for fifteen. The alternative to death is imprisonment for life, and it is worth being exact about that because 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 Act, the Arms Act, the Kidnapping Act, the Strategic Trade Act and the Criminal Procedure Code. It did NOT do it in the Dangerous Drugs Act. Section 54 of Act 846 is the whole of what it does here: it substitutes twelve strokes for fifteen in section 39B(2) and deletes subsections (2A) and (2B). 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. Two procedural consequences follow automatically. Section 41 removes a section 39B charge from the Sessions and Magistrates' Courts, so it is tried in the High Court. Section 41B(1) provides that bail «shall not be granted» where the offence is punishable with death, and also where it is punishable with more than five years. Section 39C escalates for a person with prior admissions or convictions under the consumption and possession provisions, to five to seven years with up to three strokes for the first escalation.

If prescribed or medical

Nimetazepam is a dangerous drug and it was a medicine, and the Act treats it as both. 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 the question for a medicine is never whether the substance is scheduled but whether the handling sits inside that authority. It is named in Part III of the First Schedule as «Nimetazepam». 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 it inside Part IV of the Act, where section 16(1) empowers the Minister to make regulations «controlling the manufacture, sale, possession, and distribution of such drugs». Nimetazepam was a hypnotic medicine and is one of only two benzodiazepines in the First Schedule, the other being «Flunitrazepam». Its Poisons List row carries the dangerous drug marker with no preparation named against it in any Group column, which is the list recording that nothing containing it is available through the ordinary supply route.

Documentation

Carry the prescription and the dispensing label with the medicine, in its original packaging, and declare it on arrival. The entry the label has to answer to is «Nimetazepam» at Part III of the First Schedule, and a dispensing label naming a different member of that Part is not the same thing. 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. Neither Act fixes a number of days or a number of tablets for a dangerous drug, and this cell does not invent one.

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.