KUALA LUMPUR — The Malaysian Medical Association (MMA) has welcomed today’s High Court decision to grant a stay on the enforcement of the Price Control and Anti-Profiteering (Price Marking for Drug) Order 2025.
The move pauses any enforcement or penalties against private clinics until the court reaches a final ruling on the judicial review application, of which MMA is a co-applicant.
In a statement, MMA president Datuk Dr Thirunavukarasu Rajoo said the court’s decision affirms that the legal issues raised by the association warrant comprehensive judicial consideration.
“We wish to be clear: MMA has never been against medicine price transparency. We support it. Patients have every right to know what they are paying for. What we have consistently opposed is the use of Act 723 — a trade and consumer protection statute — to regulate the practice of medicine,” he said.
He highlighted that transparency in private healthcare is already governed under existing legislation.
“The law for this already exists. Act 586 and its 2006 Regulations have governed patient rights, obligations on charges, and grievance mechanisms in private healthcare for nearly 20 years. The legal framework for transparency in private healthcare was put in place long before this controversy. The government did not need Act 723 to achieve price transparency. The correct instrument was already there,” he said.
“A doctor treating a patient is not a shopkeeper selling goods. That is not a technicality. It goes to the heart of how healthcare is defined under Malaysian law.”
The association also raised concerns over regulatory duplication.
“The government’s own Akta Iltizam commits to reducing the regulatory burden by at least 25 per cent and mandates a One-In-One-Out policy — for every new regulation added, one must be removed.
“Private clinics are already comprehensively regulated under Act 586. Imposing Act 723 on top of that does not reduce regulatory burden. It adds to it. This is not consistent with the government’s own stated policy,” Dr Thirunavukarasu said.
He emphasised that MMA has engaged with the matter constructively from the outset, through dialogue, a memorandum to the Prime Minister, and ultimately through the courts.
“We did not come to litigation lightly. We came because the jurisdictional concerns we raised, together with our coalition partners, remained unresolved after more than a year,” he added.
The stay does not settle the legal issues, which the court will determine in due course. “We respect that process and will await its outcome,” Dr Thirunavukarasu said.
He urged the government to consider the implications of applying a new regulatory layer to a sector already governed under the appropriate law. “These are not minor procedural concerns. They go to the integrity of how this country regulates healthcare,” he said.
MMA reaffirmed its commitment to a private healthcare system that is transparent, accountable, and genuinely in the interest of patients. – May 21, 2026