Urban Renewal Bill could impact constitutional rights, says lawyer

 

The Urban Renewal bill is scheduled for retabling during the Dewan Rakyat session beginning Jan 19. NSTP/FILE PIC

KUALA LUMPUR: A senior lawyer has warned that the proposed Urban Renewal Bill could impact property rights protected under Article 13 of the Federal Constitution.

Datuk M. Reza Hassan said any forced redevelopment mechanism, even if based on majority consent, potentially denies the rights of minority owners and could lead to the unfair deprivation of property.

He said the Constitution guarantees that no person shall be deprived of property save in accordance with law and with adequate compensation.

"If this principle is compromised, it opens the door to human rights violations, he said when commenting on the bill."

Reza said that the bill risks violating principles of natural justice, particularly where there is a power imbalance between property owners, developers, and authorities.

He said that without clear and transparent safeguards, owners who are financially vulnerable or lack legal knowledge could be sidelined in decision-making processes that significantly affect their lives.

He added that the bill also creates room for the abuse of administrative power if discretionary authority is granted too broadly without effective judicial review.

"In administrative law, power must be exercised reasonably, based on public interest, and not arbitrarily," he said.

Reza said from a social law perspective, urban redevelopment without guaranteed equivalent resettlement risks causing urban marginalisation and affecting housing rights, particularly for low-income groups.

He added that without robust and comprehensive legal protection, the bill appeared to benefit specific parties rather than genuinely protect the interests of the people.

The bill is scheduled for retabling during the Dewan Rakyat session beginning Jan 19.

It was first tabled on Aug 21 last year and underwent its second reading on Aug 28, but was deferred before it could be debated or decided upon.

The deferment followed protests from various quarters, including members of parliament and residents' associations, over issues such as the proposed low consent threshold and the lack of clear protection and compensation for residents. - NST