PETALING JAYA: Olympian Noraseela Khalid says the rights of pet owners must be protected, regardless of whether they keep cats, dogs or rabbits, after filing a legal suit against the Selangor government and the Petaling Jaya City Council over a blanket ban on dogs in strata residential properties.
Noraseela filed the suit to challenge regulations she says unfairly penalise responsible pet owners living in apartment units. Her lawyer, Rajesh Nagarajan, filed the case at the Shah Alam High Court yesterday, naming the Selangor government and the Petaling Jaya City Council as respondents.
Noraseela also plans to take legal action against the management committee of Shang Villa Condominium in Petaling Jaya, which she claims is attempting to enforce a no-pet ruling.
"I am standing up for pet owners' rights. It does not matter whether it is cats, dogs or rabbits," said Noraseela, who represented Malaysia in the 400m hurdles at the 2012 London Olympic Games.
"I filed this suit not for my own benefit, but on behalf of pet owners and animal lovers."
Noraseela said she was angered by the condominium management committee's decision to ban residents from keeping pets. She added that she had been issued four penalties by the committee for owning three adopted cats.
"One of my neighbours took a photograph of my balcony, where one of my cats was resting, and posted it in the residents' WhatsApp group. That person claimed I had broken the rules on pet ownership," she said.
"The majority of residents do not agree with the new rules. I also want to ask, 'What about privacy laws? Who gave that person the right to take a photograph of my property?'"
She added that the management committee had initially barred her from entering the condominium premises because she had yet to pay the penalties.
"They had no right to stop me from entering the condominium grounds as I am up to date with my maintenance charges and other fees. I am disputing the penalty because the no-pet rule is new," she said.
"After my lawyer asked the committee to show him the rules and regulations that allowed them to bar me from entering the premises, they relented and allowed me in. However, they did not respond to his letter."
Noraseela said the ruling had caused distress among residents, including long-term occupants.
"There are residents who have lived here for more than 10 years. I know of an elderly lady whose only companion is her dog. What is she supposed to do?
"Several people have already moved out because they did not want to part with their pets. There should be some empathy for animals. If there are irresponsible owners, then by all means take action against them, but do not penalise everyone."
Commenting on the suit against the city council and the state government, Rajesh said the council's Licensing of Dogs and Kennel Establishments By-Law 2007 contravenes federal legislation, including the Local Government Act 1976 and the Strata Management Act.
"Section 8(2) of the by-law prohibits residents from keeping dogs in apartment units under the council's jurisdiction," he said.
"This is a clear case of a local authority acting beyond its legal powers. Instead of regulating responsibly, it imposed an unlawful and arbitrary blanket ban with no evidence, proportionality or lawful authority.
"Such overreach is legally indefensible, and when councils place convenience above constitutional rights, the courts must intervene."
Noraseela said she could have brought the case before a tribunal but chose to proceed in the High Court so that any ruling would have nationwide effect.
"It is expensive, but I hope it will be worth it in the end," she said.
