What about the 273 violations in KL City Plan, FT ministry asked

What about the 273 violations in KL City Plan, FT ministry asked

Planning and local government expert Derek Fernandez says many of the amendments were illegal development orders while NGO Selamatkan Kuala Lumpur asks how the violations will be corrected.

PETALING JAYA:
Days after the government told critics of the newly gazetted Kuala Lumpur City Plan (KLCP) 2020 to “move on” from the issue, a planning and local government expert has reminded the federal territories ministry that none of the amendments tabled as part of the draft plan were made available to the public as required under law.

Derek Fernandez told FMT that many of the amendments were in substance illegal development orders which he alleged were passed because the previous administration refused to gazette the 2008 version of the plan.

This was after it had gone through public hearings and received recommendations from the hearing committee to address the problematic issues.

Derek Fernandez.

“This was because many of these development orders were inconsistent with the decisions and recommendations of the hearing committee chaired by Halimaton Saadiah Hashim,” he said.

“Many of the development orders were inconsistent with sustainable development principles as they violated the plan which is a social contract between the public and the government for planning and development control in Kuala Lumpur.”

Federal Territories Minister Khalid Abdul Samad said on Wednesday that it had been necessary to gazette the plan despite objections as areas such as green lungs would otherwise be left unprotected.

However, Fernandez said the correct approach should have been to gazette the 2012 finalised plan which had gone through the public hearing process and was chosen by the hearing committee, irrespective of subsequent violations.

Kuala Lumpur City Plan (KLCP) 2020. (dbkl.gov.my pic)

“These can be compiled into a list of abuses or an addendum to show deviations from the plan on the ground and the prima facie abuse in issuance of development orders,” he added.

“This list or addendum would then be subject to later investigation or review.”

He also criticised Khalid’s statement that most of the re-zoning had been carried out and some buildings already constructed, saying this was irrelevant.

He reminded the minister that the integrity of the Pakatan Harapan government was at stake in the matter, urging him to seek legal advice from the Attorney-General’s Chambers to ensure that the correct plan was gazetted under the Federal Territory (Planning) Act 1982.

NGO Selamatkan Kuala Lumpur likewise disagreed with the government’s move to gazette the current version of KLCP 2020.

Its deputy chairman M Ali said Khalid had repeatedly stated that the plan was approved despite 273 violations.

“How were these violations determined? Were the violations identified based on information from Kuala Lumpur City Hall officers who were directly involved in the episode, or from any other neutral third party?

“Those concerned about KLCP 2020 would like to learn from the minister how all the violations, if they are truly limited to 273, will be corrected.”

Ali also warned the authorities not to absolve themselves by using “outdated provisions of the law”, and called for the rectification of all abuses in KLCP 2020 without waiting for finalisation of the draft KLCP 2040.

He likewise asked that measures be taken to avoid carrying the irregularities of KLCP 2020 over to the draft plan for 2040.

The Save Taman Rimba Kiara group also asked what decisions had been made on the violations.

“Has the full extent of the violations been accounted for? Or are there actually some things which are violations but not recognised as such? We don’t know,” its representative Leon Koay told FMT.

He also questioned Khalid’s failure to consult with civil society or meet with residents associations (RAs) over the matter.

“It wasn’t done. Maybe if he had seen a few hundred RAs, that would have been shorter than putting the plan on public display.

“Meeting the RAs would not have taken two years. It could have been done in three to six months.”

A representative from another NGO who wished to remain anonymous asked whether the attorney-general (AG) had been briefed on the violations.

“There may be an addendum which lists out the violations, but what is their legal status? Are you acknowledging that the government broke the law? And if so, does that mean you are acknowledging liability?”

The representative added that the matter came under the Federal Territories Act, therefore the Cabinet is bound by the actions of the federal territories minister.

“The AG needs to be clear about what the minister has done to bind the federal Cabinet. Has he bound the Cabinet to a list of acknowledged violations?”

The draft KLCP 2020, which was launched in 2008 and finalised in 2012, was not gazetted by the previous administration, with constant changes made to the finalised plan over the years.

Stay current - Follow FMT on WhatsApp, Google news and Telegram

Subscribe to our newsletter and get news delivered to your mailbox.