From Wan Agyl Wan Hassan
On Sept 27, a one-year-old boy lost his life at the Bukit Kajang toll plaza. A lorry carrying scrap iron rammed into waiting vehicles. In seconds, a child was gone, at least seven others were injured, and another family left broken.
Brake failure was cited as the cause. But Malaysians know these tragedies are never about a single mechanical fault.
They are symptoms of a broken system, one where unsafe vehicles continue to operate, where fragmented enforcement leaves gaps, and where accountability rarely extends beyond the man behind the wheel.
This pattern is painfully familiar. A recent study revealed that one person dies in a lorry crash every 36 hours in Malaysia.
Causes range from poor vehicle maintenance, overloading, and driver fatigue to weak enforcement and profit-driven industry practices. Toll plazas, bottlenecks by design, amplify these risks. When heavy vehicles fail, they fail catastrophically.
Malaysia is not without reforms. From October 2025, all commercial vehicles must have speed-limiting devices, with retrofits mandatory by July 2026.
The transport ministry is also considering the adoption of UN safety standards such as advanced braking, blind spot detection, and stability control.
Meanwhile, the Road Transport Department (JPJ) has begun nationwide inspections, suspended vocational licences of drivers involved in crashes, and blacklisted operators with outstanding summonses. These are meaningful steps.
But they are fragmented. And fragmentation is exactly the problem.
After the dissolution of the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD) in 2018, responsibility for heavy vehicle safety became dispersed across JPJ, the Land Public Transport Agency (Apad), the transport ministry, and the police. This has diluted accountability and left Malaysia without a central authority capable of coordinating inspections, enforcing standards, and driving systemic reform.
Global practice shows us a better way. Australia introduced the Chain of Responsibility (CoR) law, ensuring that consignors, loaders, and company directors share legal accountability when safety rules are breached. The UK implemented the Direct Vision Standard, forcing lorry operators in London to adopt safer cab designs to protect pedestrians and cyclists.
Both countries also maintain centralised regulators: Australia’s National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) integrates enforcement, audits and education under one roof. These are models Malaysia can adapt.
If Malaysia is serious about breaking this cycle of crashes, three reforms are non-negotiable:
1. Legislate corporate liability: A CoR framework must make companies legally responsible for unsafe practices, from poor maintenance to unrealistic delivery schedules. Drivers cannot be the sole scapegoats for systemic negligence.
2. Re-establish a central authority: Whether through reviving SPAD or creating a new commission, we need one empowered independent regulator to unify inspection regimes, integrate crash data, and act decisively against errant operators.
3. Protect victims and families: Establish a dedicated compensation fund for victims of commercial vehicle crashes, financed through industry levies. If we can mandate Perkeso coverage for gig workers, we can ensure families affected by systemic failures are not abandoned.
None of these reforms is radical. They are mainstream in other jurisdictions and long overdue in Malaysia. The real challenge is political will: confronting industry resistance, overcoming bureaucratic silos, and putting public safety above profit margins.
The Bukit Kajang crash should be another turning point. But the truth is, many Malaysians no longer know how many turning points this government needs before it finally acts.
How many more children must be buried, how many more families shattered, before safety is put above excuses? Every toll we pay already carries a hidden cost in lives.
If we allow this cycle to continue, then the next tragedy is not a question of if; but when.
Wan Agyl Wan Hassan is the founder and CEO of MY Mobility Vision, a transport think tank. He is an FMT reader.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.