“Our plans are always at the top of the elite group; we think of big buildings. We are proud to hear it, but what convenience is this for the people?”
Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim asked this pertinent question to the Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) at the launch of the Warisan Kuala Lumpur initiative, which aims to rejuvenate the city’s historic core.
He said: “That is why I have instructed DBKL that I will not accept grand, monumental projects just for the sake of prestige.
“What I want are clean, well-managed small buildings - stalls and facilities that are dignified and serve the 75 to 80 percent who represent the real heartbeat of this city.”
The big question is: Will the city’s administrators retreat into a cocoon to avoid answering the question and heeding his directives?
Many such projects have already been approved, and work has started. Dozens of high-rise buildings are coming up, and DBKL’s generic answer will be: “If we revoke or revise the development order, we will have to compensate the developer.”
When DBKL has already alienated land or is involved in vanity projects as a joint venture partner, providing the land for a developer to construct the buildings, is there land remaining for projects that benefit the community, such as recreational areas and affordable housing?
An embarrassing rebuke from the courts
Even the Taman Rimba land in Taman Tun Dr Ismail was supposed to end up in private hands, and the Federal Court’s decision stands as a monument of shame and illustrates the nexus and methodology of such alienation.
In a scathing attack, it quashed the development order and said there was a conflict of interest in that the applicant (DBKL) and the approving body were the same. It found that the mayor and the federal territories minister sat on Yayasan Wilayah Perseketuan’s (YWP) board of trustees.
In the court’s judgment, read by Nallini Pathmanathan, the development order ought to be set aside because the mayor was a trustee of YWP.
“We concluded that there was a conflict of interest and/or bias afflicting the decision of the mayor, which is a separate and independent ground of challenge. It therefore follows that on this ground alone, the impugned development order is void and ought to be set aside.
“The mayor, therefore, wore three hats in three capacities: the mayor was part of the entity that approved the subject land’s alienation, the mayor was part of the applicant for planning permission (YWP) as it was a member of the board of trustees, and the mayor was also the entity that granted the impugned development order,” she added.
Hasn’t anyone learnt from this highly embarrassing debacle? Was any action taken or even considered after the derisive judgment?
No, at one time, many in DBKL and those associated with it considered themselves immune and untouchable, and the feeling is that they still are.
All sound, no action
Earlier this year, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) also noted that 97 parcels of land owned by DBKL had been sold since 2011.
“The process was too loose, prone to abuse of power, and protected neither the interest of DBKL nor the people of KL,” PAC said in a statement.
In response, I wrote: “Like many others, the report immediately evoked public outcry but remained in the archives without remedial action.
“Such reports are met with disdain and condescension, with retorts like: ‘Who’s scared of the big bad wolf?’
“The perpetrators knew that even if they were investigated, nothing would come of it, and no one would face sanction or prosecution.
“This line of thought was not unexpected, though. The PAC had already said that ‘political considerations’ were in play, hence the assurance of non-action with protection provided by ‘Big Brother’ in high places.”
So, will a day come when politics and politicians are kept out of the administration?
Not likely. Despite the promises of “no political appointees” in 2022, DBKL’s advisory board is packed with politicians or those associated with political parties.
Let’s turn to the housing project in Taman Fadason in Kepong, which was launched in 2012 as a joint venture between DBKL and a private developer.
The buyers paid a 10 percent deposit to the developer for the units, which were estimated to cost between RM1.2 million and RM2 million. The project has not taken off, and the buyers are waiting for their units.
The developer agreed to repay some buyers in instalments, but after a while, they stopped.
Over the years, they have repeatedly gone to the developer’s office and DBKL but have been given the runaround.
Will DBKL accept responsibility or wash its hands? I have repeatedly asked for transparency in such deals and joint ventures. The powers-that-be have not answered. Will they do the same to Anwar?
Citizen Nades is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.