Little Napoleons still on the loose

Upon being elected in May, the government promised transparency and accountability. It declared that nothing would be hidden or swept under the carpet. Citizens rejoiced getting multiple doses of records and numbers in a series and over several weeks.

We knew about the gaping holes in the collection of government revenue; we were informed of the humongous salaries earned by heads of government agencies; and the exorbitant allowances paid to directors of government-linked-companies and even government departments. In short, little remained secret.

For a while, it was “novelty” - learning one fact after another - and it did not end with the announcement of the voluminous seizure of money and valuables from the residence of the daughter of the former prime minister. Eyeballs popped out when the loot was eventually toted up. Then the list of “beneficiaries” of monies stolen from 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) drew even bigger and louder oohs and aahs.

While every Malaysian would like to thank the authorities who helped us learn the extent of the looting of our coffers, the same cannot be said of the access to simple information from local councils.

Little Napoleons still exist, at least in the third tier of government - local councils - which approve anything from hawker licences to the construction of huge townships. Their notoriety to hide under officialdom is no secret but had been adopted as a “Standard Operating Procedure (SOP).

Perhaps, the fact that there are now no-nonsense ministers in the hot-seat equally backed by an energetic government has not registered with some.

Yesterday, Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) summarily dismissed a request for documents related to a high-rise project near Desa Putra Condominium in Wangsa Maju.

The brash and impetuous manner in which the request by residents was handled is reminiscent of the bad old days. There was a time when even innocuous requests for basic information were denied – often (ab)using the civil service mantra – the Official Secrets Act (OSA).

However, it is apparent that for some senior DBKL officials, little or nothing has changed. They still want to continue ruling the roost with their autocratic rule, which is oppressive and repressive by nature.

Residents want access to all information, including the Developmental Impact Assessment (DIA), Transport Impact Assessment (TIA) and the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) for good reasons.

They want to study these documents and comprehend the implications of the proposed 46-storey service condominium being erected at their doorstep. Besides, the apartments project, two other condominiums - one of 48 storeys and another, 42 storeys, are being developed in the neighbourhood. Residents want to know if the existing infrastructure is enough to sustain these additional units.

These are relevant when the residents attend a public hearing on the project on Oct 16 but DBKL’s City Planning department director Nurazizi Mokhtar declared that there is “no need” to furnish residents with the project's traffic impact assessment (TIA) report.

“There is no need to (give them the TIA report)... We do everything following the rule of law, and at the moment there is no such requirement,” Malaysiakini quoted Nurazizi as saying.

He argued that there is no such requirement (to provide) but there is also no requirement to “hide” the report or prevent access to the public. Fortunately, he did not throw the OSA card!

So, what are they going to discuss at the meeting with zero information on the project? Nurazizi may need a lecture or a lesson in the rule of law but his bloopers continue.

The developer, he clarified, had not fulfilled the conditions needed for a social impact assessment (SIA), development impact assessment (DIA) or an environmental impact assessment (EIA).
How did his department accept a development application without the complete documentation? If these have not been done, why have a hearing in the first place? Why is DBKL in such a hurry? Surely, it does not represent the developer!

If the government can tell us the cost of transportation projects involving several billion ringgit, why can’t assessment reports be made public by local authorities?

The time has come for ministers to crack the whip on those who deny basic information to the public. What is being sought (in most instances) is information that should have been in public domain. Without facts and figures, how do they make a decision?

---

R NADESWARAN has been writing on local councils for four decades and says they have to change their attitude and outlook to be in line with the aspirations of the government. Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com - Mkini