The issue of uncontrollable children is no longer peculiar in the present days. Uncontrollable children can be found in almost every country across the globe. Although this issue is no longer novel, uncontrollable children are being defined and treated differently in different jurisdictions. On this note, numerous international legal instruments have been adopted to protect the welfare of all children which include the protection of the uncontrollable children. This article aims to comparatively analyse the available provisions extracted from international legal instruments that form part of the international legal framework on uncontrollable children with the Malaysian legal framework regarding uncontrollable children. This is done to determine the consistency between the former and the latter legal frameworks. The preliminary finding from this article is that the legal framework on uncontrollable children in the Child Act 2001 has substantially incorporated proper treatment which is required by the international legal framework and is consistent with the international legal framework. This can be seen in particular following the disintegration of the treatment on uncontrollable children and juvenile offenders as well as the prioritisation of family-based care subsequent to the 2016 amendment of the Child Act 2001. This development to carry out reform process is commendable in the aspect of children’s rights and is consistent with the aspiration of the international legal framework in preserving the best interest of the child which includes uncontrollable children. In reaching this finding, content analysis was carried out pertaining to the provisions of the international and Malaysian legal frameworks on the treatment of uncontrollable children which suggests that the Malaysian government has been taking some significant efforts to incorporate the international standards within its domestic law.

At present, there are several dispute resolution mechanisms that are available to resolve disputes between states. International law regards all states to be standing at an equal footing that makes state consent to be required in the dispute resolution process. Meanwhile, Islamic law presents dispute resolution as one tenet to achieve justice which is in line with the Shariah and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) traditions. This article will describe and analyse the dispute resolution mechanisms in international law and Islamic law by focusing on the distinctive traits between these two. This is needed in order to evaluate suggestions on how to ensure the establishment of the International Islamic Court of Justice (IICJ) as a convenient forum for dispute resolution among Muslim States that was proposed by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in 1981 but has not been materialised until today. Using qualitative method and library-based research, primary and secondary sources from various sources are examined to provide a comparative analysis on the concept of dispute resolution in international law and Islamic law. The preliminary findings from this study suggest that in order to properly established the IICJ as a medium of settling the difference of views among the Muslim states, it must be encouraged that all Muslim states must ratify the Court’s Statute. The OIC must organise inclusive dialogues to explain the working of the Court particularly to its member states to make it workable in resolving disputes and achieve considerable results in preserving peace as well as securing justice between Muslim states.

The unprecedented health and social crises caused by COVID-19 has extended the ongoing humanitarian issues of the people living in Palestine. It was reported by the World Health Organization that until 14th of August 2021, there were 349,108 cases of COVID-19 and 3,891 deaths reported in Palestine. In such a context, international laws in particular international humanitarian law (IHL) and international criminal law (ICL) can offer vital protection and recourse to prevent any destructive effect from the pandemic to Palestinians. The purpose of this article is to examine the contents of IHL and ICL that can be applied in mitigating the effects of COVID-19 in Palestine. This article argues that there are specific principles and provisions in these areas of laws that could play significant roles in this context. Using a qualitative method, primary and secondary sources are examined to address how IHL and ICL could come into play to address the impeding humanitarian needs of the people living in Palestine. The preliminary findings from this article indicate that IHL and ICL provide workable solutions that can be ventured further in dealing with COVID-19 in Palestine.

The exceptional health crisis resulting from the spread of COVID-19 intensifies the vulnerability of the people living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). It was reported by the World Health Organization that until 6th of July 2020, there are 4,277 active cases of COVID-19 and 16 deaths reported in Palestine. There are identified factors and vulnerabilities of the Palestinian population living in the OPT that are likely to exacerbate the impact of the disease such as lack of hygiene and healthcare facilities. In such a context, International Humanitarian Law (IHL) obligations on part of the Occupying Power to protect the health and life of the occupied population are particularly relevant to prevent any destructive effect from the pandemic to the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The purpose of this article is to underline the roles of IHL in mitigating the effects of COVID-19 in the OPT. This article argues that there are specific provisions of IHL that could play some roles in mitigating the effects of COVID-19 in the OPT. Using a qualitative method, primary and secondary sources are examined to address how the provisions of IHL could come into play to address the impeding humanitarian needs of the people living in the occupied territory. The preliminary findings from this article indicate that the IHL is important to protect the people in the occupied territory from the widespread fatality of COVID-19.