As a resident living within the ‘stretch of contention’ of the proposed Damansara-Shah Alam Highway (Dash) for over a decade - 12 years to be precise, I was astonished to read about the statements reportedly said by the Kota Anggerik assemblyperson Yaakob Sapari in the The Star news report headlined ‘State government gives the go-ahead for work to begin on Dash’ on Oct 5, 2015.

Firstly, I would like to rebut the reported comment he made, “in the case of Dash, only about 12 percent of those who would be affected are protesting, and their properties only make up 200m of the 20.4km stretch”.

As a state assemblyperson, Yaakob’s whimsical statement is erroneous and uncalled for. Based on the drawings furnished by the project concessionaire - Prolintas and information found in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Dash will clearly affect 1km of densely populated condominium buildings, double storey houses, church and businesses in Damansara Perdana and part of Mutiara Damansara.

Yaakob’s claim of only about 12 percent of those who would be affected are protesting is unfounded. There are currently at least 12,000 affected homes and condominiums in Damansara Perdana and Mutiara Damansara. This does not even include the people working or owning businesses in this neighbourhood yet.

Since 2012, there have been thousands of protest letters and petitions submitted to the prime minister, works minister, Selangor menteri besar, and Majlis Perbandaran Petaling Jaya, to name a few.

So where did Yaakob obtain his information? Were there any critical information withheld from residents? If so, why? Shouldn’t these be shared as part of the mandatory public consultation process and one of the terms set by menteri besar before a highway project can be approved?

Being an elected assemblyperson, we would also expect Yaakob to be responsible in making such sweeping statements on the supposed approval of Dash (which has now been clarified and denied by the menteri besar himself) and be fluent with town and country planning requirements - not just to make statements to please the ears of his voters in his constituency.

Dash has not fulfilled the requirements to go ahead as the Rancangan Tempatan Petaling Jaya 2 has yet to be finalised.

Even more strange is having a Kuala Selangor councillor (Mohd Fakaruddin Ismail) advising and speaking on behalf of the project concessionaire when Kuala Selangor is nowhere even close to Petaling Jaya or Shah Alam.

As a resident and member of the general public, I cannot help but to question the true motives and interests of these parties and possibly the back hands who are truly pushing for this project? From comments made from the residents in Shah Alam, it is obvious that their only source of information is what they hear from the project concessionaire’s briefings.

As an observer, I see one group of residents urging the sacrifice of minority residents so that they no longer rely on a supposedly congested road plying their housing development to get onto an existing highway. On the other hand, I see a group of residents fighting fervently for more than three years just to keep a multi-billion elevated six-lane tolled highway project from bulldozing an already dense and developed township which sees no need for a monstrous highway as Dash.

All they are asking for is a realignment

Despite been accused with all sorts of names, racial remarks, this group of residents persevered without retaliating. They are not even asking for the project to be cancelled despite many flaws found in the studies and the processes in granting the project approvals to date. Instead, all they are asking for is a realignment out of the already dense township they are in to which an elevated highway has no room for.

It is, as I see it, a fair and reasonable request seeing that the Dash provides little to no benefit to the townships of Damansara Perdana and Mutiara Damansara but instead adverse effects from health, economy and quality of living.

From a chest-thumping government of transparency, accountability and good governance, all these behind the scene dynamics is worrying. By keeping mum and spewing vague responses, this charade is clearly paving the way for proponents to undermine the rights of the people who are only trying to advocate good town planning and to protect their own homes.

Is Selangor institutionalising oppression against the minority through the actions of its elected representatives?