On the issue of the right against enforced disappearance, a dis�nc�on must be made between ‘enforced disappearance’, ‘missing person’, ‘kidnapping’ and ‘abduction’ by referring to Sec�on 3 of the Kidnapping Act 1961 and Sec�on 362 of the Penal Code of Malaysia.11 46.1. Sec�on 3 of the Kidnapping Act 1961 provides a case will be one of kidnapping where a ransom is demanded: “Abduc�on, wrongful restraint or wrongful confinement for ransom 3(1) Whoever, with intent to hold any person for ransom, abducts or wrongfully confines or wrongfully restrains such person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be punished on convic�on with death or imprisonment for life and shall, if he is not sentenced to death, also be liable to whipping.” 46.2. Whereas, Sec�on 362 of the Penal Code of Malaysia provides that: “Abduc�on 362. Whoever by force compels or by any decei�ul means induces any person to go from any place, is said to abduct that person.” 46.3. 47. There is no express defini�on of a ‘missing person’ but generally speaking when someone has not been seen or heard from for a period of �me without any news of his/her whereabouts or whether he/she is s�ll alive, he/she is said to be a missing person. Cases where there appears to be no criminal elements, are usually categorised as missing persons. It is essen�al that the State conduct inves�ga�ons and provide evidence and explana�ons to the family of the disappeared person. This duty is embedded in the right of the family to know the truth regarding what happened to their loved one. The right extends to the members of the family insofar as it is a viola�on of mental and moral integrity of the next of kin which is a direct consequence of the enforced disappearance. This was highlighted in the case of Bamaca-Velazquez v 11 There are other various offences relevant to the discussion on enforced disappearance, among others: Sec�ons 359 to 369 of the Penal Code. 15 PASTOR RAYMOND KOH 46.