Groups urge retraction of Urban Renewal Bill, to rally outside Parliament

Representatives of over 90 NGOs and associations gathered to oppose the recent tabling of the Urban Renewal Bill, alleging it was unfair, legally unsound, and would affect the rights of homeowners.

They also said the proposed legislation would grant too much power to developers, at the expense of homeowners.

“We demand that the government retract the bill and announce a moratorium on all urban renewal development plans until a fairer and comprehensive law is enacted,” they said in a statement during a press conference in Petaling Jaya, Selangor, today.

They added that they would hold a rally outside the Parliament tomorrow.

Among the NGOs that participated in the presser were Lawyers for Liberty, KL Residents Action for Sustainable Development (KLRA+SD) - which represents 75 associations, PJ Sejahtera, and the National House Buyers Association.

Also backing the groups were the Federation of Malaysian Consumers Associations (Fomca), Gabungan Darurat Iklim Malaysia, and the Institute for Strategic Analysis & Policy Research (Insap).

Among the leaders who attended the media conference were N Surendran (LFL), Tan Booi Charn (KLRA+SD), Shanti Somasundram (PJ Sejahtera), and Rafidah Ibrahim (Jawatankuasa Tindakan Kampung Sungai Baru).

‘Transformational process’

The Urban Renewal Bill was tabled in the Dewan Rakyat for its first reading on Aug 21, with the government describing it as a transformational process to coordinate the redevelopment of dilapidated townships, boost economic growth, and increase property value.

The bill was also meant to address high population density, fix dilapidated amenities, and address the lack of modern infrastructure in old townships. The law was also said to be more transparent compared to the Land Acquisition Act 1960 (Act 486).

However, the groups were not impressed with this argument.

Surendran argued that the bill, if passed, would undermine constitutional rights.

“If a developer secures 75 percent agreement, the government can use the Land Acquisition Act to seize the homes of the remaining owners.

“Where is the protection for the right to property under our Federal Constitution?” Malay Mail Online reported him as asking.

Tan said her coalition had held multiple consultations with the Housing and Local Government Ministry, but most of their recommendations were ignored.

“Almost all our key points were dismissed when the Bill was tabled. If public input is disregarded, what was the point of these engagements?

“We are not against renewal, but it must protect the people,” she added.

According to the statement, the group claimed that despite the ministry organising 108 consultation sessions with stakeholders, the final draft of the bill bears little difference from the heavily criticised original version.

“And without proper discussions after the deadline for giving feedback (which) expired on March 31, the bill was still tabled, ignoring the inputs given,” the statement read, adding that the request for multi-stakeholder discussion sessions was also ignored.

Risk of eviction

As for the proposed bill, the groups oppose the 75 percent agreement threshold for a redevelopment project, adding that it would allow action to be taken against the 25 percent who oppose the project.

“It means even those with legitimate reasons to oppose would receive a penalty, in terms of getting a lower compensation or being evicted forcefully from their community.

“This is against the Federal Constitution, particularly Articles 8 and 13, which guarantee equality before the law and the right to own property,” they added.

They also questioned the term “urban renewal” in the bill, arguing that the scope was wide and could cover almost all types of real estate.

“This is compounded by the absence of strong protection mechanisms for homeowners under existing laws.

“Even now, we don’t really have a proper check and balance mechanism, allowing developers to move aggressively with the help of the authorities.

“And the Urban Renewal Bill will only make matters worse by giving developers more ‘arsenal’, using the bill and Act 486,” they claimed.

Recommendations

As such, the groups proposed six recommendations which were absent from the proposed bill, as follows:

• Consent threshold of at least between 95 and 100 percent;

• Limit the powers of land acquisition;

• Fair compensation above market value, with profit-sharing for owners;

• An opt-in option for those initially unwilling;

• Stricter rules on developer qualifications and guarantees against abandoned projects; and

• A trust fund for building maintenance and public facilities.

According to Malay Mail Online further, Rafidah warned that without proper safeguards, the bill risks enriching developers at the expense of displacing ordinary people.

“If the government cannot do it right, don’t do it at all,” she said.

Urban Renewal Bill breaches constitutional rights of ownership - LFL

Urban Renewal Bill consent threshold among world's highest - ministry

Bipartisan pushback fails to stall Urban Renewal Bill

PKR MPs want Urban Renewal Bill debate postponed, PN lauds move