The eviction operations in Kampung Papan over the past week have exposed a troubling gap between government assurances and realities on the ground.
What was presented as a routine legal process has, in practice, left residents, activists, and even journalists questioning whose authority truly dictates the fate of the village.
Based on an article on the Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) website, Kampung Papan was actually opened by settlers who had been living there since 1939, when the country had not yet achieved independence.
From 1968 to 1989, they received a temporary occupancy licence (TOL).
In 1992, the Selangor government began to survey the land with the settlers, who had to pay RM70 for the process. They were also assured that this step was being taken in order to receive land ownership.
All 38.4ha of land involved were later transferred to Tabung Projek Perumahan Terbengkalai Sdn Bhd (TPPT) in 1995 to build houses for the settlers.
In 2007, TPPT brought in developer Melati Ehsan Consolidated Sdn Bhd and granted it power of attorney (POA), also for the same purpose.
The village today
Today, only 181 structures remain, 83 of which still have residents, and 44 households have interim court orders as they challenge eviction.
Selangor Menteri Besar Amirudin Shari has repeatedly stated that only vacant homes would be demolished. Yet, when I visited the village on Nov 12, the scene suggested otherwise.
Early that Wednesday, bailiffs arrived at the first house, where a disabled resident was unable to walk. He lay bedridden, yet activists and PSM members urging a delay were ignored. The bailiff initially insisted on removing the man’s bed so demolition could proceed.
Only after intervention by the police was a 45-minute window granted before moving on.
At the next house, an elderly resident had vacated but requested his home be dismantled to salvage materials. The bailiff refused. When reminded that the court order allowed eviction, not demolition, the bailiff insisted that the developer, as landowner, had the right to knock it down.
PSM activists continued to highlight the discrepancy between the menteri besar’s assurances and the developers’ actions.
Asked directly about the government’s statements, the bailiff and developer representatives replied that they were only following court orders.
The message was clear: promises made by politicians were irrelevant to the operation on the ground.
Deliberate confusion
State executive council member Borhan Aman Shah reiterated on Nov 14 that only vacant structures would be demolished. Yet he did not address complaints from residents or activists that occupied homes had already been affected.
I don’t want to respond to his statement; instead, please watch this video.
In the video, Tony Leong from DAP said the developer never agreed to demolish only the empty ones.
He also confirmed that during an Oct 21 meeting with the developer, no promise was made to spare occupied homes. Leong’s account challenges reassurances from the authorities.
So, it is clear that the statements made by Borhan on Nov 14 and the Selangor MB on Oct 2 are deliberately meant to confuse.
The presence of law enforcement further complicated the situation.
Around noon, Klang Selatan district police chief Ramli Kasa arrived. Media and activists were kept at a distance.
When a PSM member attempted to approach him, a police officer intervened. Ramli looked at her and asked, “Where are you from?” She replied, “I am a member of PSM”.
Then, Ramli ordered one of the officers to “take her statement”. I was shocked! Since when can answering a question in a loud voice be an offence, to the point of ordering her to give a statement?
He later walked through the village, paused to smoke in his vehicle for nearly 30 minutes, and refused to answer journalists, deferring queries to the Selangor police chief.
Worrying reality
For residents, these events illustrate a worrying reality: the line between legal compliance, political assurances, and developer ambitions is blurred.
Evictions, presented as orderly and limited only to vacant homes, actually appear arbitrary and inconsistently enforced.
Neutral actors, such as bailiffs, sometimes act as de facto agents of the developer rather than upholding procedural fairness.
Civil society voices insist that clarity, accountability, and respect for interim court orders must be maintained. Without such oversight, families risk losing homes and livelihoods to operations conducted under murky interpretations of authority.
Kampung Papan is not simply a legal dispute. It is a test of governance, transparency, and the state’s commitment to vulnerable communities in the face of urban redevelopment pressures.
The residents’ lived experience, backed by activists and journalists on the ground, contrasts sharply with official statements, highlighting a gap between rhetoric and reality.
Can the system be trusted?
As demolition continues, the key question remains: can residents trust the system that governs them, or must they rely solely on their own vigilance to protect their homes?
The lessons from Kampung Papan are clear. Hard news must go beyond press releases and official statements, examining both the letter of the law and the lived realities of those most affected.
Only then can the public understand whether promises of protection for occupied homes are genuine or simply a political façade.
Since the leader of the Madani government often quotes the “Thirukural” in speeches, I will conclude this commentary with one of its verses:
“Kolaimerkon Taarir Kotidhe Alaimerkontu
Allavai Seydhozhukum Vendhu”
Translation: Even more ruthless than a murderer is a head of government who rules with injustice and oppression.
Note: This verse is a general moral statement and does not refer to any living or deceased individual. - Mkini
B NANTHA KUMAR is a member of the Malaysiakini team.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.