SNTS response to YB Zaidys statement to Malaysiakini

Dear YB Zaidy Abdul Talib,

When we met this past Tuesday (19 Jan) to discuss the residents’ concerns about the Sungai Besi Ulu Kelang Expressway (SUKE), you and I agreed that we had a responsibility to clear the air and be transparent about what had transpired during the meeting with the general public.

As such, I was disappointed to read your statement in Malaysiakini on Wednesday (20 Jan) (https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/327603) where you said that “the objections raised have been ‘cleared’ with the protesters.”

That was the absolute opposite outcome of the meeting that I and my fellow residents attended. The fact that I have to write this letter to denounce and object to your statement already shows that the objections we have are most definitely ‘not cleared’ as you claim.

YB Zaidy, at the very start of the meeting you told us the objective of the meeting was to show that the Selangor State government cared about the Rakyat and to clear the air of any misconceptions.

We should have taken that as a red flag that our facts didn’t matter and the meeting was just a tick box exercise to be completed. From our conversation and from the way you represented the Selangor government, it appears that the government has already made up their mind that the residents’ complaints was without merit and SUKE was to proceed.

The Environmental Impact Assessment Report that was confirmed expired on 31 Dec 2015 was miraculously valid once more on the day we went for this meeting with you. Apparently the DOE Director of Malaysia who responded to us had neglected to check his facts before responding. How convenient.

Our independent review of the EIA by the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide was rejected outright and not even discussed at length as it was done by “orang luar”. Foreigners who had no idea on the regulations of Malaysia. So any input they have would not even be considered for discussion.

Our many concerns on air and noise pollution, dangers to safety of they public, increase of dengue outbreaks were similarly disregarded without a second thought as we were not “certified” experts. It did not matter that we were highlighting excerpts from the SUKE EIA report itself.

Instead of responding to all the concerns we highlighted, you “educated” me that in Islamic Fiqh that greater good of the public came before the suffering of the few. Therefore the people adjacent to the highways should sacrifice their health and tranquillity so that SUKE could be built. This is something we should accept as part of urban living.

I am not an expert in religion so I decided to do some research and came across this article from Harakah. (http://www.harakahdaily.net/index.php/kesatuan-fikrah/33648-penggunaan-fiqh-muwazanah-dalam-membuat-keputusan)

For my non-Muslim friends, Islamic Fiqh is a mechanism used by Muslims to help the faithful reach a fair and equitable decision. Based on this article (which I find much closer to the concept of Islam I know) , there are 3 levels of need (Maslahah) defined by Fiqh that must be taken into consideration.

‘Dhoruriyat’ – The basic needs to sustain a person’s life. If there is no ‘Dharuriyat’, then there will be human destruction, loss of amenities, suffering in this World and punishment in the Hereafter.

‘Haajiyat’ – All that mankind needs to avoid ‘Mashaqqah’ (hardship). Without ‘Haajiyat’, mankind will face hardship in life, even though life itself is sustained.

‘Tahsiinaat’ – All matters that qualifies and are proper for magnificent morality, esteemed dignity and beautiful tradition.

In my humble religiously uneducated opinion; the dangers of air and noise pollution to public health fall under the ‘Dhoruriyat’ category. Exhaust from modern vehicles are carcinogenic (can cause cancer) and prolonged exposure means we are all being slowly poisoned.

Selangor’s only justification for SUKE would be to provide provide a fast and comfortable journey to one’s destination. That would fall under ‘Haajiyat’ if we did not point out that this highway also increases local traffic, meaning that while some would experience convenience, it is at the expense of local residents. And all this will be done for a 60-year concession period to collect toll and enrich anyone and everyone with a stake in the company at the expense of residents who spent their life savings owning a decent house in an urban area.

We asked for alternative considerations like public transportation, especially when the Ampang Jaya Municipal Council had earlier provided plans to allow an LRT track to be built along the alignment that SUKE wants to occupy. Such a consideration would fall under ‘Tahsiinaat’ where the subject matter would avoid the exorbitant cost of a RM5.4 bil highway, the noise and air pollution and victimising existing residents.

Instead of going through our complaints and criticisms using the Islamic Fiqh system as you suggested, we find ourselves victimised by our lack of funds to hire proper experts to challenge government experts. We find ourselves bullied into submission because you are simply telling us a conclusion of your own interpretation without seeking our consent.

So pardon all of us ‘uneducated’ residents who do not agree with your statement to Malaysiakini.

Maybe you can continue to educate us further by responding to our demand that the meeting minutes be prepared and published in three working days. Respond to our meeting in writing so that our uneducated minds can digest and study the formal justifications from the Selangor State government. Be a transparent and accountable government like how you preached during GE12 and GE13 when you asked us residents to trust you with our votes.

Let our lawyers understand why the Town and Country Planning Act can be disregarded based on other sections of the law as your panel of government officers claimed during the meeting. Let us have the results in writing so that we can communicate to the Rakyat why they should sacrifice their health & peace of mind for the greater good of SUKE.

Pardon me if my words appear harsh, but I too have a responsibility to fulfil by telling the general public the residents’ view of what happened during the meeting. Thank you for reminding me of my responsibility.

Akhir kata; perasaan kami bak pepatah Melayu “Yang teguh disokong, yang rebah ditindih.”