MARCH 23 — Is it stage play, drama or a sham (in Bahasa Melayu it is called sandiwara)?
There are two scenes for us to see.
Scene 1 — KL City Plan 2020
In just over a month, this grand plan that has been delayed for far too long managed to confuse KLites or even the whole country on its “life.”
At first the minister said he would not approve it but later clarified that he will not approve it in its present state and will not “bulldoze” the plan entirely. Several opposition MPs then called for him to vacate his post. Last week, the mayor says it would not “make sense” to gazette the original plan as it is so close to 2020.” DBKL plans to introduce a new development blueprint for the city and a new blueprint is being drafted for development until 2050. “Common sense tells us there is no point in gazetting the plan now, with only three years left,” he added.
A week later on 22 Mar 2017, the minister says the government has not cancelled the Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan 2020 (KLSP 2020), instead is improving it. He said the plan had yet to be gazetted in view of still much more room for improvement taking into consideration the dynamic development taking place in the federal capital. “My ministry is going over the plan with a fine-tooth comb and it is still at the evaluation stage...” he added.
I wish to highlight that if one looks at PEMANDU’s ETP, KLSP 2020 was gazetted in November 2004. It emphasises the vision by outlining goals, development strategies and policies of the development of Kuala Lumpur. KLCP 2020 was prepared for the purpose of translating KLSP 2020 into specific strategic directions including the determination of land use and development for each property lot in Kuala Lumpur.
Therefore, KLSP 2020 was a precursor to KLCP 2020.
Scene 2 — Tun Mahathir-Nazri debate
Malaysians are hungry for intellectual discourse. Especially when it is between someone who has helped build and make the country famous some years ago and a minister, a former de-facto law minister with “special guts.”
It seems the minister had the blessings of the home minister and the latter’s deputy had approved the permit application for the debate after receiving it from the organiser.
A day later, an acting police chief said the application was rejected after taking into consideration factors of safety, public order and protection of public rights and freedom. He added that the application came late and the venue is a restricted premise under Section 3 of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012. There were also numerous police reports lodged by the public and local residents who were concerned about their own safety including their families. The police felt it was not in the best interest of the people there.
How Nazri retorted shows the “special guts” that he possess. “Since when did Malaysia become a police state? Since when could anyone be denied their rights when they have done nothing wrong? I am saddened and disturbed.” The “owner” of the venue too had already given him the greenlight to use the school’s hall.
Would an incumbent member of parliament want to provoke his own constituents? I guess those who made the police reports thought so and indirectly showed the level of confidence they have in their own representative. To stretch it further, could their fears be just paranoia?
Now, let us analyse the two scenes above.
Scene 1
No... yes... no... yes. Can someone please decide whether KLCP 2020 is the same as KLSP 2020 and is it still in existence and be gazetted?
The other point is a mayor whose vision is to achieve progress, prosperity and welfare of the capital city said it would not “make sense” to gazette the original plan and is drafting a new blueprint. The minister later overrule him and says the government has not cancelled and still evaluating it.
Next, what would happen if the Federal Territories is expanded to include Penang, Langkawi and certain parts of Malacca? Seriously, would they get more attention?
Scene 2
If this is the response of Malaysians towards a debate (fear of their safety including their families), we are a million miles away from being a developed nation. The fact that the police buy the argument is another subject matter.
Contrary to Scene 1, an acting police chief effectively went against the decision made by a deputy minister.
Next, would a debate come under the purview of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012?
The KSN, IGP and the Attorney-General will have a lot of work to do based on the above two scenes
I guess the prime minister, with all his wisdom, has to intervene and ensure ministers and bureaucrats alike know where and what their limits are. He may also want to immediately direct a ministry to look at the level of Malaysian mentality since we are hardly three years away from 2020.
We may not be a failed state but surely Malaysians are confused. It seems we are all of a doodah about the state of things unless it is a “sandiwara.”
What say you...
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.
