From Michael Singho

The recent launching of the Melaka Waterfront Economic Zone (M-WEZ) that would involve an unbelievable reclamation exercise along 33km of Melaka’s coastal stretch came as a shock that spelled the state’s obsession with sea reclamation.

Has the Melaka government, the prime driver of this gargantuan initiative, obtained the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) reports on this massive reclamation exercise involving 40 concessionaires and 25,000 acres (10,117ha)?

What they need is another current and more elaborate macro-EIA study and report as the last one that involved only 19 concessionaires for 7,024 acres was made 24 years ago in 1997 and is starkly outdated.

Is the government using the 1997 macro-EIA report as qualification for this new project that is three and a half times the size or using it only as a part of it? If it is the latter, have they obtained the EIA and SIA reports on the remaining areas?

Or does the state government feel that the EIA and SIA reports, which are compulsory in development projects of this size, not necessary?

This monstrous project that will devour a major portion of the Melaka coastline, will exert a negative impact on the environment, alter the ecosystem, and destroy the coastal marine life and resources.

It will also further aggravate the drainage, effluent discharge, pollution and flushing mechanisms.

This will in turn increase flooding in the state, already made more intense by current reclamation works.

The state needs to find solutions to these first before embarking further.

What about the heritage status accorded to Melaka by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (Unesco)? Are they willing to lose this or does the state feel that it has outlived its purpose?

Is the “goose that lays the golden eggs” going to be the “sacrificial lamb”?

There will also be great negative impact and disruption on the economic, societal and cultural landscapes on the coastal clusters.

The communities that depend on or are linked to the sea and its coastal environment will also be badly affected.

The Melaka Portuguese heritage hinges on the sea and its world-renowned Portuguese Settlement relies on the same for sustenance and livelihood.

After the bid to reclaim the sea fronting the Portuguese Settlement by Olympia Land was aborted in the late 1990s, there was a declaration by the state, substantiated by studies made in the 1997 macro-EIA report, that there would be no more reclamation projects for the Portuguese Settlement seafront in the future.

It is imperative that the state revisit the 1997 macro-EIA report pertaining to this and other related conditions in it.

In article 4.3.7 (of 4-39) Key Socio-Economic Impacts, it states clearly:

(iii) Portuguese Settlement:

The sea is their “life and culture”. The loss of direct access to the sea will disrupt their way of life and culture. Whether fishing is still the main occupation or not is not the issue here.

It is whether the loss of the sea directly around them (and its environmental conditions) will ultimately change their lifestyle and culture. As the sea is an important element in their life, this aspect has to be considered in the design phase.

This is an acknowledgment that the sea and its coastal environment are vital features to the Portuguese Settlement, the vibrant, yet vulnerable Portuguese cultural heritage and to Malaysia’s Portuguese-Eurasian community.

The sea is linked irrevocably to our history, culture, identity, spirits and hearts.

To deprive us of the sea, is like taking away our lifeline.

Is the state government bent on obliterating the Portuguese Settlement and the Portuguese community by taking the sea away from us?

Michael Singho is the president of the Malacca Portuguese-Eurasian Association and an FMT reader.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.