Commenting on the proposed reclamation projects in Penang, Chow Kon Yeow, executive council member for local government, stated on Aug 25 that the government is open to reviewing the projects. He said “the state administration is not above the law and will have to abide by the rules just like everybody else. We have to follow the law.”
Well said. But shouldn’t the government follow all laws, not only laws pertaining to reclamation?
When residents of Desa Jelita, Permatang Damar Laut, complained about factories operating in their residential zone, the municipal council (MPPP), under the present government, had emphatically stated that industries are not permitted to operate in residential zones, being in violation of Section 27(2)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1976.
Having first told the residents that action would be taken to get the factories out of the residential zone, the very same MPPP then quietly went ahead and re-zoned the three rows of shophouses as “industrial” without consulting the Department of Environment which would have objected, as the “industrial zone” is separated from residences by a mere 4-meter back-lane.
Did the government follow the law in this case?
When pressed for an explanation, the MPPP defended its action claiming that the conversion was done under the directions of the State Planning Committee under section 4(5) of the same Act.
The first part of this section states that the SPC can give directions to the local authority, which the latter must carry out.
The second part, a proviso, makes it clear that Sec. 4(5) is not a blank cheque. The proviso states that any directions given must not be inconsistent with any other provisions of the Act.
Since the act prohibits industries from operating in residential zones, did the SPC have the power to disregard the proviso? Nowhere in the Act is the SPC given the discretion to oust the operation of Sec. 27(2)(a) in any residential zone.
Since the SPC does not have the power to override Sec. 27(2)(a) where it is already in operation in any residential zone, the conversion of the three rows of shop-houses in Desa Jelita from “residential/commercial” to “industrial” cannot be legitimate.
Could Chow Kon Yeow therefore please explain the State Planning Committee’s overriding Sec. 27(2)(a) of the Act by claiming that it is empowered to give “any” directions to the local authority when the proviso clearly prohibits giving any instructions contrary to any other provision in the Act?
Since the law was not followed, it is hoped that Chow Kon Yeow will take steps to restore the original “residential/commercial” status of the three rows of shophouses. I don’t think this would have happened if the backyards of VIPs homes were abutting the 4-metre back lane that separates residences from the industries.
The legalising of industries in residential zones is also not consistent with the state government’s slogan about making Penang “Cleaner, Greener, Safer, Healthier”.
Ravinder Singh is an FMT reader
With a firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the writer’s personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or opinions given by any third party content provider.