`

THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!

Saturday, March 18, 2017

Reclaimed land or not, it still belongs to Malaysia



YOURSAY | ‘Anuar, you have singlehandedly managed to draw attention to your stupidity...’
Wira: So, according to Sekijang MP Anuar Manap, shared land does not belong to foreigners? What stupid argument is this.
Strata title means they have joint ownership to the land where the apartment is built. Indeed, there is a big difference between leasehold and freehold land.
At the end of the lease period, the lessee will have to surrender the land (with everything on it) back to the leaseholder, which is the state government. There is no such surrender clause in the case of freehold land.
Léon Moch: Obviously Anuar does not know that the National Land Code 1965 provides that land covered by water is also considered land and the Law of the Sea Convention recognises the continental shelf, ie, the seabed and the subsoil covered by the water column of the sea up to 12 nautical miles from the baseline, is part of Malaysia's territorial sea in which Malaysia has sovereignty.
The Territorial Sea Act 2012 provides that states have jurisdiction over land matters at sea up to three nautical miles from the baseline.
This means that Forest City, which is within the three-nautical mile limit, is in fact state land belonging to Johor over which it can legislate for land matters, mining, exploration, etc.
Anonymous_1421806811: Reclaimed land or not, freehold land has freehold status. Much as this MP thinks he can fool the people, he himself is the ultimate fool.
Bluemountains: When one tries to defend the indefensible, he ends up being very confused himself.
Take your time, Anuar. We can give you until next week to find out the meaning of "strata land" if there is one. Don't forget to tell us when you have got the answer, okay?
RM2.6 Billion Turkey Haram: By the way, did the Forest City developers reserve 30 percent of the condominiums for bumiputeras as in other housing estates?
Or is it because the development is on reclaimed land that it need not follow the rules?
Anonymous 122461436161429: Yes, Anuar's answer is ridiculous. Billions are spent on reclamation and for whom and what? Foreigners and profits.
Therefore, Malaysian citizens were clearly and intentionally not factored in this development. And allowing foreigners will certainly change the demographics in time. See what happened in Sabah.
Maybe we need more Chinese to dilute the blur Malays as they are allowing all this to happen while screaming their heads off that this is their country.
Starwars: There is no limit to stupidity and we have a dumb MP who don't even know the status of the land/property in question.
He is from Umno, a party that claims to be the champion of Malay rights. They sell our land to foreigners openly without any shame. And they have the audacity to lie to the public.
Prudent: There are really no substantial issues as to whether the land is freehold or leasehold.
Under the amendments to the National Land Code, as pushed through by then PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the state can take back the land no matter whether it is leasehold or freehold and pay whatever compensation it thinks fit.
The owners of the land so forfeited can only challenge the quantum of the compensation in the courts and not the forfeiture of the land. This issue is raised purely for Umno's voters in the kampong.
Just a Malaysian: Forest City makes good economic sense. The aim is to bring in RM450 billion from reclaimed land in the sea.
The spin-off is positive for surrounding areas, including Singapore. Investors may opt to move factories into Johor and create employment. It can become a summer home for the rich.
To some extent, I do fear a swarm of rich uncouth mainland Chinese running around the country and affecting our Malaysian way of life. On the other hand, the economic spin-off may be beneficial.
The Analyser: This is another storm in a teacup. Had Mahathir not targeted Forest City as part of his ‘Hate the Chinese’ vendetta, nobody would have taken any notice of this matter.
There is nothing underhand going on here apart from a minor case of false advertising (which is rampant in Malaysia) of which potential buyers should have made themselves aware before signing anything.
Fairnsquare: The success of Pontian, Gelang Patah and the surrounding areas, which were sleepy hollows for the last 50 years, speaks for itself and those from other states who have not been here will not understand.
Mahathir should focus on other issues and leave the Forest City project alone. Lim Kit Siang, the MP for Gelang Patah, has kept quiet all this while because he must have seen the wisdom of the project.
Slumdog: Well done Anuar, you have singlehandedly managed to enrage citizens and draw attention to your stupidity by trying to furiously back-paddle.
But I have to say that this is normal behaviour for Umno politicians. They race each other to see who can make the most ridiculous and unintelligent comments.
Headhunter: Land or sea, it's still Malaysian soil. Anuar must be too daft to see it differently. By his reckoning, all the states now can reclaim their land and sell it to foreigners.
Maybe China can also build their military base on the reclaimed land too.
Rupert1: Reclaimed land or not, the land still belongs to Malaysia.
The bottom line is why give freehold titles - and a tax-free zone to boot - to foreigners to enjoy at rakyat's expense, while the privileged Umnoputras and some members of the royal family pocketed the revenue and profits?

Hardboiled: Reclaimed land isn’t land apparently. It just appeared out of nowhere and so selling it to foreigners is like selling air.
Okay, now I get it. Thanks for the clarification, Anuar.- Mkini

No comments:

Post a Comment