PUSHING OUT THE VULNERABLE, SAY OPPONENTS
The Bill has already been criticised by politicians and some property owners before its tabling in parliament.
Kubang Kerian MP Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man, who is deputy president of PAS, argued that existing legislation was sufficient.
“There is no need to introduce a new law for development, what is more important is ensuring that urban demographics are not monopolised by a single race,” he said.
“Once this Act is passed, the affected areas will be redeveloped. Those who previously bought homes for over RM100,000 will not be able to afford to repurchase them at over RM500,000,” he added.
Claiming that a minister had said banks are available to provide loans, Tuan Ibrahim continued: “So the minister wants capitalists to monopolise the process. This is a subtle method to push out those who cannot afford it, particularly Malays and Indians.”
A significant number of property developers in Malaysia are led by ethnic Chinese, although Malays are the largest ethnic group in the country.
Tuan Ibrahim made his remarks, reported by news portal Malaysiakini, at a press conference on Feb 19.
His comments echo that of PAS Youth’s Hafez, who said the Bill “will implicitly deny the voice of minorities, undermine socio-economic stability and oppress the rights of certain groups”.
In a statement on Feb 25, Hafez said: “This Bill is also seen to put pressure on urban residents, especially the Malay community who are less able. This new legal provision is found to favour developers who are interested in the name of urban renewal. Minorities will be oppressed. They will be forced to move out and surrender their land against their will.”
Another vocal opponent of the Bill is Chang Kim Loong, secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association.
The association, which advocates for homebuyers’ rights, disagrees with the reduced consent threshold, and not the Bill or redevelopment in itself.
Speaking to CNA, Chang argued that the proposal to lower consent thresholds infringes on property rights protected under Article 13 of the Federal Constitution.
“This forces a minority of owners to relinquish their property rights against their will,” he said, adding that he disagreed with the racial tones the debate has taken.
He further warned that while developers might offer a one-to-one unit exchange, the act could lead to gentrification and densification.
“Imagine a five-storey (block) with 200 owners being replaced by a high-rise with 3,000 owners on the same plot. Such densification would strain existing infrastructure beyond capacity,” he said, adding traffic congestion would worsen.
