In practice, questions arise about whether the legal categorization of individuals as refugees, or their exclusion from such categorization, is influenced by the preferences of host states. In the case of Sabah, despite meeting the criteria outlined in international law, Filipino Muslim refugees were not granted refugee status. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) remaining silent on this issue prompts inquiries into its willingness to navigate potentially challenging political situations to protect refugees. The categorical exclusion of Filipino Muslim refugees in East Malaysia from international protection and from UNHCR's data collection effectively erases their challenges and experiences from the narrative. Their absence in the data means that their struggles and the issues they face remain unknown, hindering effective responses to their needs.

The categorizations that underlie the legal classification figures can be vague. The historical, social, and material conditions of refugees' experiences, which are excluded from what is categorically quantified at the local level, take on a life of their own at the global level. For instance, the categorization 'others of concern,' despite its well-intentioned flexibility, served as a convenient loophole for the Filipino refugees in Sabah. It acknowledges a need for protection, yet without the legal obligations that come with formal refugee recognition. Filipino refugees, which fall under the estimated population figure of 80,000 with a sudden drop to 50,000 in 2019, does not receive the same attention or consideration as those falling under more established, legally defined categories in West Malaysia due to the ambiguity of this category. The Filipino refugees face a paradoxical situation: they are acknowledged yet ambiguously defined, counted in numbers but with their stories and hardships concealed by their loose categorisation.

Questions:

1. How does UNHCR ensure the transparency of its decision-making processes, especially when they lead to a significant change in the status or categorisation of a population?
2. How many refugees were unable to regularize their status, and what impact did this have on their access to services, employment, and protection from detention or deportation?
3. How many children were at risk of statelessness due to their parents' lack of proper documentation?
4. How many refugees were deported following the inter-agency raids and regularization operations?
5. How many refugees lacked access to adequate sanitation, contrary to WHO and UNICEF data for Malaysia?
6. How many Filipino refugees were categorized as "others of concerns" by UNHCR, and how did this affect their access to protection and services?
7. What measures are being taken to address the legal and socioeconomic issues faced by the excluded Filipino Muslim community in East Malaysia?
8. Why is there a suden significant decrease in the reported number of Filipino Muslim refugees in East Malaysia in 2019 from 80,000 to 55,000?